Sri. Mohandas S/o. Shankar Baikerikar vs Sri. Krishna S/o. Shankar Baikerikar. — 27/2020
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section UnderOrder,VII,Rule,1,R/w,Section,26. Status: HEARING. Next hearing: 24th March 2026.
O.S. - Original Suit
CNR: KAUK020007642020
Next Hearing
24th March 2026
Filing Number
27/2020
Filing Date
05-09-2020
Registration No
27/2020
Registration Date
05-09-2020
Court
PRL. SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM, KARWAR
Judge
520-PRL. SNR. CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM COURT, KARWAR
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Sri. Mohandas S/o. Shankar Baikerikar
Adv. S Ravi Belurkar
Respondent(s)
Sri. Krishna S/o. Shankar Baikerikar.
Sri. Ravi S/o. Vishnu Baikerikar (UFM)
Sri. Sudhakar S/o. Shankar Baikerikar
Sri. Dinkar S/o. Shankar Baikerikar
Sri. Ramesh Shakar Baikerikar.
Smt. Rajani D/o. Shankar Baikerikar
Smt. Praveena W/o. Santosh Shet.
Smt. Shobha W/o. Madhav Bandiwadekar
Hearing History
Judge: 520-PRL. SNR. CIVIL JUDGE AND CJM COURT, KARWAR
HEARING
HEARING
HEARING
HEARING
HEARING
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 18-03-2026 | HEARING |
| 16-03-2026 | HEARING |
| 09-03-2026 | HEARING |
| 06-03-2026 | HEARING |
| 26-02-2026 | HEARING |
Interim Orders
Summary The court partially allowed Defendant No.4's application to reject the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC. While the court found that the plaintiff had disclosed a valid cause of action and the suit was not barred by limitation (both being mixed questions of law and fact), it held that the plaintiff had undervalued the plaint by paying insufficient court fees. The court directed the plaintiff to pay the correct court fee on the market value of the property within 30 days, failing which the plaint would be liable for rejection. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The court partially allowed Defendant No.4's application to reject the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC. While the court found that the plaintiff had disclosed a valid cause of action and the suit was not barred by limitation (both being mixed questions of law and fact), it held that the plaintiff had undervalued the plaint by paying insufficient court fees. The court directed the plaintiff to pay the correct court fee on the market value of the property within 30 days, failing which the plaint would be liable for rejection. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts