Shital Sachin Phapale vs Dattatray Sakharam Phapale Advocate - Kanhore G. L. — 79/2020
Case under Specific Relief Act Section 34,38. Disposed: Uncontested--TRANSFERRED / MADE OVER on 16th March 2026.
Spl.C.S. - Spl.Civ.Suit
CNR: MHAH080014712020
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
1365/2020
Filing Date
03-12-2020
Registration No
79/2020
Registration Date
04-12-2020
Court
Civil Court Senior Division , Sangamner
Judge
8-2nd Jt. Civil Judge Senior Division
Decision Date
16th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--TRANSFERRED / MADE OVER
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Shital Sachin Phapale
Adv. Dhumal K. D.
Sachi Sachin PhapaleRepresented by Guardian - Shital Sachin Phapale
Respondent(s)
Dattatray Sakharam Phapale Advocate - Kanhore G. L.
Lata Dattatray Phapale
Usha Pravin Phapale
Pratyush Pravin Phapale
Manisha Rajendra Gaikar
Bhavana Pradip Kute
Prakash Sakharam Phapale
Ashok Sakharam Phapale
Sampat Sakharam Phapale
Arun Sakharam Phapale
Bhimabai Sakharam Phapale
Shaila Sampat Phapale
Hearing History
Judge: 8-2nd Jt. Civil Judge Senior Division
Disposed
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 16-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 09-03-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready | |
| 19-01-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready | |
| 24-11-2025 | Argument on Exh.____Unready | |
| 11-09-2025 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
Interim Orders
The court rejected the application filed by defendants 7 and 8 seeking exemption from filing an affidavit, citing COVID-19 as the reason for non-compliance with court orders. The court found their explanation inadequate and held that the defendants failed to provide sufficient justification for the delay, thereby directing them to file the required affidavit and exempting them from the penalty upon compliance. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The court rejected the application filed by defendants 7 and 8 seeking exemption from filing an affidavit, citing COVID-19 as the reason for non-compliance with court orders. The court found their explanation inadequate and held that the defendants failed to provide sufficient justification for the delay, thereby directing them to file the required affidavit and exempting them from the penalty upon compliance. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts