✦ Bombay High Court · 29 Sep 2025

Nitin Ramesh Garajkar v. Megha Nitin Garajkar

Fca No. 23 of 2012JADHAV

Case at a glance

Key paragraphs

  • Para 33. Permission is granted. Appeal is, therefore, disposed of as withdrawn. [SMT. VAISHALI PATIL–JADHAV] JUDGE [NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI] JUDGE komal kamble

Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO. 23 OF 2012 Nitin Ramesh Garajkar VERSUS Megha Nitin Garajkar … • Adv. Shritej Surve h/f. Mr. Surve Hemant, Advocate for Appellant … WITH FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO. 16 OF 2013 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14962 OF 2018 IN FCA/23/2012 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15 OF 2013 IN FCA/16/2013 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4995 OF 2021 IN FCA/23/2012 … CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI AND SMT. VAISHALI PATIL–JADHAV, JJ. DATE : SEPTEMBER 29, 2025 PER COURT :

1.

Learned advocate for the appellant has instructions to withdraw the appeal. Copy of letter dated 27.09.2025, addressed by the appellant to the learned advocate, is placed on record. Same is marked ‘X’ for identification.

3.

Permission is granted. Appeal is, therefore, disposed of as withdrawn. [SMT. VAISHALI PATIL–JADHAV] JUDGE [NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI] JUDGE komal kamble

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Bombay High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Fca No. 23 of 2012). ← Search more judgments