Archana Shankar Gaikwad vs Radhakisan Bhikaji Makasare Advocate - Shelke M. B. — 25/2022

Case under Specific Relief Act Section 22,34,38. Status: Evidence Part Heard. Next hearing: 15th April 2026.

Evidence Part Heard Next hearing 15-Apr-2026 this date has passed

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHAH180000912022

Filing Number

28/2022

Filing Date

13-Jan-2022

Registration No

25/2022

Registration Date

13-Jan-2022

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Rahuri

Judge

12-Civil Judge Senior Division

Last updated 13-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Specific Relief Act Section 22,34,38

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Archana Shankar Gaikwad

    Adv. Bachkar B. S.

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Radhakisan Bhikaji Makasare Advocate - Shelke M. B.

  2. 2.Malan Radhakisan Makasare

  3. 3.Suman Radhakisan Makasare

  4. 4.Balasaheb Radhakisan Makasare

  5. 5.Sandip Radhakisan Makasare

  6. 6.Alka Rajendra Dabhade

  7. 7.Ramesh Machhindra Ghugarkar

  8. 8.Prakash Dhondiram Kalhapure

  9. 9.Babasaheb Appasaheb Thanage

  10. 10.Sharad Subhash Dangat

  11. 11.Rajendra Vitthal Nikam

Case History

  1. 15-Apr-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 09-Mar-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

    Civil Judge Senior Division

  3. 26-Feb-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

    Civil Judge Senior Division

  4. 29-Jan-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

    Civil Judge Senior Division

  5. 11-Dec-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    Civil Judge Senior Division

  6. 18-Nov-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    Civil Judge Senior Division

  7. 28-Aug-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    3rd Jt Civil Judge Jd and JMFC

  8. 24-Jun-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    3rd Jt Civil Judge Jd and JMFC

  9. 04-Apr-2025

    List of Witness

    3rd Jt Civil Judge Jd and JMFC

  10. 15-Mar-2025

    Issues

    3rd Jt Civil Judge Jd and JMFC

  11. 23-Jan-2025

    Issues

    3rd Jt Civil Judge Jd and JMFC

  12. 30-Nov-2024

    Issues

    3rd Jt Civil Judge Jd and JMFC

  13. 10-Oct-2024

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    3rd Jt Civil Judge Jd and JMFC

  14. 31-Aug-2024

    Additional W.S.

    3rd Jt Civil Judge Jd and JMFC

  15. 29-Jul-2024

    Additional W.S.

    3rd Jt Civil Judge Jd and JMFC

  16. 28-Jun-2024

    Depositing Amount

    3rd Jt Civil Judge Jd and JMFC

  17. 02-Apr-2024

    Depositing Amount

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  18. 02-Feb-2024

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  19. 02-Jan-2024

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  20. 22-Nov-2023

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  21. 30-Oct-2023

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  22. 04-Oct-2023

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  23. 04-Sep-2023

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  24. 04-Aug-2023

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  25. 17-Jun-2023

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  26. 04-May-2023

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  27. 05-Apr-2023

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  28. 27-Mar-2023

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  29. 27-Mar-2023

    Order on T.I.View PDF

    Summary: The court rejected the plaintiff's application for temporary injunction under Order 39 of the Civil Procedure Code. The plaintiff, seeking partition and possession of ancestral joint family property, failed to establish a prima facie case, as the properties had already been partitioned by decree in 2000, after which defendants became absolute owners and subsequently sold portions to third parties. The court found that no injunction can be issued against the family Karta (manager) to restrain alienation of coparcenary property, and the balance of convenience did not favor the plaintiff. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  30. 27-Mar-2023

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  31. 21-Mar-2023

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  32. 20-Mar-2023

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  33. 06-Mar-2023

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  34. 27-Feb-2023

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  35. 23-Feb-2023

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  36. 16-Feb-2023

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  37. 14-Feb-2023

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  38. 06-Feb-2023

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  39. 01-Feb-2023

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  40. 30-Jan-2023

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  41. 25-Jan-2023

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  42. 23-Jan-2023

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  43. 13-Dec-2022

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  44. 22-Nov-2022

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  45. 11-Oct-2022

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  46. 16-Sep-2022

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  47. 18-Aug-2022

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  48. 16-Jul-2022

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  49. 21-Jun-2022

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  50. 05-May-2022

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  51. 25-Apr-2022

    Appearance

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  52. 10-Mar-2022

    Appearance

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  53. 25-Feb-2022

    Appearance

    Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

  54. 19-Jan-2022

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  55. 13-Jan-2022

    Case filed

    Registration No. 25/2022

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The court rejected the plaintiff's application for temporary injunction under Order 39 of the Civil Procedure Code. The plaintiff, seeking partition and possession of ancestral joint family property, failed to establish a prima facie case, as the properties had already been partitioned by decree in 2000, after which defendants became absolute owners and subsequently sold portions to third parties. The court found that no injunction can be issued against the family Karta (manager) to restrain alienation of coparcenary property, and the balance of convenience did not favor the plaintiff. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case