HIRABAI HIRAMAN WADKAR AND ORS vs BALKRISHNA NATHOBA SHITOLE (SINCE DECEASED) 1. — CRA/541/2018

Case under C.p.c.- (Interlocutory Order). Disposed: Contested--Dismissed on 15th April 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 08-Oct-2018

CNR: HCBM010429412018

Filing Number

CRA/26949/2018

Filing Date

19-Sep-2018

Registration No

CRA/541/2018

Registration Date

03-Oct-2018

Judge

Hon'ble Ms. Justice Gauri Godse

Coram

Hon'ble Ms. Justice Gauri Godse

Bench Type

Single

Category

ORDINARY CIVIL ( 30 )

Sub-Category

ORDINARY CIVIL ( 11 )

Judicial Branch

Civil

Decision Date

15-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Dismissed

Last updated 03-May-2026

Acts & Sections

C.p.c.- (Interlocutory Order)
Specific Relief Act

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.HIRABAI HIRAMAN WADKAR AND ORS

    Adv. Niranjan Mogre

  2. 2.SHOBHA DILIP WADKAR

  3. 3.VISHWANATH DILIP WADKAR

  4. 4.VIKRAM DILIP WADKAR

  5. 5.ASHOK HIRAMAN WADKAR (SINCE DECEASED) THR. LRS.(Legal Heir)5.

  6. 6.SHARADA ASHOK WADKAR5.

  7. 7.KETAN ASHOK WADKAR5.

  8. 8.NEELAM MAHENDRA LONKAR5.

  9. 9.ANURADHA AMIT SAGAR

  10. 10.VIJAY HIRAMAN WADKAR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.BALKRISHNA NATHOBA SHITOLE (SINCE DECEASED) 1.

  2. 2.1.A. Minakshi Balkrishna Shitole1.

  3. 3.Pandurang Balkrishna Shitole1.

  4. 4.Sachin Balkrishna Shitole1.

  5. 5.Jayashree Nilesh Indalkar1.

  6. 6.Vandana Ajay Wabale

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 15-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Ms. Justice Gauri GodseView PDF

    The Bombay High Court dismissed the landlords' civil revision application, upholding the trial court's judgment in favor of the tenant's heirs under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act. The court held that the tenant's prior possession was undisputed and the landlords failed to prove their defense of tenancy surrender; additionally, the heirs were entitled to continue the suit for illegal dispossession as legal representatives of the original tenant. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 15-Apr-2026

    For Admission

    Hon'ble Ms. Justice Gauri Godse

  4. 06-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Ms. Justice Gauri GodseView PDF

  5. 06-Apr-2026

    For Admission

    Hon'ble Ms. Justice Gauri Godse

  6. 01-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Ms. Justice Gauri GodseView PDF

  7. 01-Apr-2026

    For Admission

    Hon'ble Ms. Justice Gauri Godse

  8. 12-Mar-2026

    Hon'ble Ms. Justice Gauri GodseView PDF

  9. 12-Mar-2026

    For Orders (Due Matters)

    Hon'ble Ms. Justice Gauri Godse

  10. 12-Feb-2026

    Hon'ble Ms. Justice Gauri GodseView PDF

  11. 12-Feb-2026

    For Orders (Due Matters)

    Hon'ble Ms. Justice Gauri Godse

  12. 27-Jan-2026

    Hon'ble Ms. Justice Gauri GodseView PDF

  13. 15-Jan-2026

    For Admission

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sandeep V. Marne

  14. 11-Dec-2025

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sandeep V. MarneView PDF

  15. 11-Dec-2025

    For Admission

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sandeep V. Marne

  16. 27-Nov-2025

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sandeep V. MarneView PDF

  17. 27-Nov-2025

    For Admission

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sandeep V. Marne

  18. 10-Nov-2025

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sandeep V. MarneView PDF

  19. 06-Oct-2020

    Order Matters

    According To Sitting List

  20. 21-Jun-2019

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sandeep Kashinath ShindeView PDF

  21. 21-Jun-2019

    Order Matters

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Sandeep Kashinath Shinde

  22. 04-Feb-2019

    Hon'ble Shri Justice K.K. TatedView PDF

  23. 04-Feb-2019

    Order Matters

    Hon'ble Shri Justice K.K. Tated

  24. 03-Dec-2018

    Hon'ble Shri Justice K.K. TatedView PDF

  25. 03-Dec-2018

    For Admission

    Hon'ble Shri Justice K.K. Tated

  26. 08-Oct-2018

    Hon'ble Shri Justice R.D. DhanukaView PDF

  27. 08-Oct-2018

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  28. 19-Sep-2018

    Case filed

    Registration No. CRA/541/2018

casestatus.in Summary

The Bombay High Court dismissed the landlords' civil revision application, upholding the trial court's judgment in favor of the tenant's heirs under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act. The court held that the tenant's prior possession was undisputed and the landlords failed to prove their defense of tenancy surrender; additionally, the heirs were entitled to continue the suit for illegal dispossession as legal representatives of the original tenant. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case