Prannali Parshuram Kadam v. Rahul Babaji Shinde

Diksha Rane 29. MCA 117-25.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 117 OF 2025 PRANNALI PARSHURAM KADAM ..APPLICANT VS.

RAHUL BABAJI SHINDE ..RESPONDENT ------------ Mr. Harshad M. Inamdar for applicant.

------------ CORAM :

RAJESH S. PATIL, J.

DATE :

3 OCTOBER 2025.

P.C. :

1.

Mr. Inamdar, learned counsel appearing for the applicant - wife submits that the respondent - husband has been served by the private notice. However, the service of the Court notice has not been indicated on the Board.

2.

Await service.

3.

Stand over to 15 October 2025.

4.

It appears that the notice has been wrongly sent to the Court of the Civil Judge Senior Division, Khed, District Pune, instead of sending it to the Civil Judge Senior Division, Khed, District Ratnagiri.

Diksha Rane 29. MCA 117-25.doc 5.

Office to resend a notice to be served on the respondenthusband to the Court of Civil Judge Senior Division, Khed, District Ratnagiri.

6.

Ad-interim relief, if any granted earlier, to continue till next date of the hearing.

(Rajesh S. Patil, J.) Signed by: Diksha Rane Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 03/10/2025 19:29:17