Anna Pandharinath Lendhe vs Ganpaath Baburao Lendha Advocate - Aher A. M. — 900113/2000
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 151. Status: Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready. Next hearing: 20th April 2026.
R.C.S. - Reg.Civil Suit
CNR: MHAH080015062014
Next Hearing
20th April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
900113/2000
Filing Date
24-01-2014
Registration No
900113/2000
Registration Date
22-02-2000
Court
Civil Court Senior Division , Sangamner
Judge
6-Jt. Civil Judge Junior Division
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Anna Pandharinath Lendhe
Adv. Gandhi A. Z.
Ramanbai @ Kusum pandharinath Lehe
Adv. Baig H. V.
Respondent(s)
Ganpaath Baburao Lendha Advocate - Aher A. M.
Sitabai Ganpat Londhe
Adv. Aher A. M.
babasaheb Ganpat Lendhe
Adv. Aher A. M.
Satish babasaheb Lehe
Adv. Aher A. M.
Dattatraya @ Dattu babasaheb Lehe
Adv. Aher A. M.
Shantabai Vasant Kajabe
Adv. Aher A. M.
Mirabai Shankar Ohol
Adv. Aher A. M.
Hirabai Bapu Datir
Adv. Aher A. M.
Jagannath Pandharinasth Lehe(Legal Heir)
Adv. Aher A. M.
The Maharashtra state Sah. Krishi Gramin Vikas B
Adv. Aher A. M.
Zillha Bhu-Vikas Bank Ltd.
Adv. Aher A. M.
Vikas Dattu Kharde
Adv. Aher A. M.
Somnath Kachru Dafhal
Adv. Aher A. M.
Shivaji Balasaheb Shimpankar
Adv. Aher A. M.
Hearing History
Judge: 6-Jt. Civil Judge Junior Division
Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready
Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready
Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready
Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready
Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 13-04-2026 | Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready | |
| 04-04-2026 | Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready | |
| 23-03-2026 | Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready | |
| 16-03-2026 | Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready | |
| 09-03-2026 | Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready |
Interim Orders
Summary: The court allowed the plaintiff's petition under CPC Order 6 Rule 17 to amend the plaint, clarifying the relationship status of defendants—specifically that Defendant 2 is the second wife of Defendant 1 (not the first wife Sitabai), and that Defendants 3 and 6-8 are children from the first wife. The court imposed costs of Rs. 5,000 on the plaintiff for the unjustified delay in filing the amendment application, though it acknowledged the plaintiff's illiteracy as a mitigating factor. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The court allowed the plaintiff's petition under CPC Order 6 Rule 17 to amend the plaint, clarifying the relationship status of defendants—specifically that Defendant 2 is the second wife of Defendant 1 (not the first wife Sitabai), and that Defendants 3 and 6-8 are children from the first wife. The court imposed costs of Rs. 5,000 on the plaintiff for the unjustified delay in filing the amendment application, though it acknowledged the plaintiff's illiteracy as a mitigating factor. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts