Disposed

Mikhail Kantroo v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 – Section 16 – appeal before Appellate Tribunal

Bombay HC9 Mar 2026WP/3142/2026

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bombay High Court, WRIT PETITION NO. 3142 OF 2026, N. J. Jamadar, J., 24 March 2026: Mikhail Kantroo v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. Time to file an appeal under section 16 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 before the Appellate Tribunal (fixed by order dated 9 March 2026) extended till 2 April 2026 because the Tribunal had refused to accept the appeal memo with

What did the court decide?

Interlocutory direction in an already-disposed Petition: time to file the section 16 appeal before the Appellate Tribunal extended till 02.04.2026; execution and operation of the impugned order to rem

Mikhail Kantroo Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors. — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Digitally signed ARUNASANDEEP by ARUNASANDEEPTALWALKAR TALWALKAR Date: 2026.03.26 11:10:08 +0530

¶2

905.WP3142.2026.DOC

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 3142 OF 2026

¶6

Mikhail Kantroo. Versus

¶7

State of Maharashtra & Ors.

¶8

...Petitioner.

¶9

…Respondents.

¶10

Mr. Swaraj Jadhav, for the Petitioner. Smt. D.S. Deshmukh, AGP for Respondent - State.

¶11

CORAM: N. J. JAMADAR, J. DATE : 24^th MARCH 2026

¶12

P.C.:

¶13

Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner.

¶14

By an order dated 9^th March, 2026, this Court had disposed of the Petition with liberty to the Petitioner to prefer an appeal under section 16 of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 before the Appellate Tribunal within a period of two weeks, and to facilitate the Petitioner to approach the Appellate Tribunal, the execution and operation of the impugned order was directed to be stayed for a period of two

weeks thereof.

1/3

Talwalkar

905.WP3142.2026.DOC

Mr. Jadhav, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, makes a statement that though an effort was made to file an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal with an undertaking that certified copy of the order passed by this Court would be tendered, the Appellate Tribunal declined to receive the appeal memo and, therefore, the appeal could not be filed.

¶20

The learned Counsel submits that certified copy of the order passed by this Court has been received and the Petitioner is now in a position to file an appeal alongwith the certified copy of the order. The learned Counsel seeks continuation of the stay to the execution and operation of the impugned order for a period of two weeks.

¶21

Since a statement is made by Mr. Jadhav with responsibility

¶22

and as an officer of the court, the said statement is accepted.

¶23

Time to file an appeal, as indicated in the order dated 9^th March, 2026, thus stands extended till 2^nd April, 2026. In the

2/3

Talwalkar

905.WP3142.2026.DOC

meanwhile, the execution and operation of the impugned order shall remain stayed till 2^nd April. 2026.

¶28

It is hereby made clear that no further request for extension of stay to the execution and operation of the impugned order shall be entertained on any count whatsoever.

¶29

[N. J. JAMADAR, J.]

¶30

3/3

¶31

Talwalkar

Mikhail Kantroo v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mikhail Kantroo v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases