Vitthalrao Kisanrao Sonawane vs Satyabhama Ashok Sonawane Advocate - Mendre G. R. — 1106/2023

Case under Specific Relief Act Section 38. Status: Hearing Without W.S.. Next hearing: 16th April 2026.

R.C.S. - Reg.Civil Suit

CNR: MHAH080023772023

Hearing Without W.S.

Next Hearing

16th April 2026

e-Filing Number

11-12-2023

Filing Number

2109/2023

Filing Date

12-12-2023

Registration No

1106/2023

Registration Date

13-12-2023

Court

Civil Court Senior Division , Sangamner

Judge

8-2nd Jt. Civil Judge Senior Division

Acts & Sections

Specific Relief Act Section 38

Petitioner(s)

Vitthalrao Kisanrao Sonawane

Adv. Aher Sudhrshan J.

Respondent(s)

Satyabhama Ashok Sonawane Advocate - Mendre G. R.

Kondyabai Manik Sonawane

Adv. Mendre G. R.

Ganesh Ashok Sonawane

Adv. Mendre G. R.

Rajendra Manik Sonawane

Adv. Mendre G. R.

Dattatray Manik Sonawane

Adv. Mendre G. R.

Balu Manik Sonawane

Adv. Mendre G. R.

Suresh Kisanrao Sonawane

Adv. NIL

Arun Kisanrao Sonawane

Adv. NIL

Hearing History

Judge: 8-2nd Jt. Civil Judge Senior Division

09-03-2026

Hearing Without W.S.

30-01-2026

Hearing Without W.S.

28-11-2025

Hearing Without W.S.

10-10-2025

Hearing Without W.S.

18-08-2025

Hearing Without W.S.

Interim Orders

02-03-2024
Order on T.I.

Summary The court allowed the plaintiff's application (petition no. 5) in Civil Suit No. 1106/2023. The court found that the plaintiff has established prima facie ownership and possession of the disputed property and that defendants 1-6 have no legal right to obstruct the plaintiff's ownership. The court directed that defendants shall not create any encumbrances on the property pending final judgment, cautioning them against causing irreparable harm to the plaintiff. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court allowed the plaintiff's application (petition no. 5) in Civil Suit No. 1106/2023. The court found that the plaintiff has established prima facie ownership and possession of the disputed property and that defendants 1-6 have no legal right to obstruct the plaintiff's ownership. The court directed that defendants shall not create any encumbrances on the property pending final judgment, cautioning them against causing irreparable harm to the plaintiff. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Civil Court Senior Division , Sangamner All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case