Kishor Chandrakant Korade vs Secretory of Rahuri Taluka Doctors And Chemist Urban Co Op Credit Society — 174/2025

Case under Specific Relief Act Section 38,. Disposed: Contested--PLAINT REJECTED on 04th April 2026.

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHAH180010872025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

25-04-2025

Filing Number

211/2025

Filing Date

25-04-2025

Registration No

174/2025

Registration Date

25-04-2025

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Rahuri

Judge

2-2nd Jt. Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

Decision Date

04th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--PLAINT REJECTED

Acts & Sections

Specific Relief Act Section 38,

Petitioner(s)

Kishor Chandrakant Korade

Adv. Kakani M.D.

Respondent(s)

Secretory of Rahuri Taluka Doctors And Chemist Urban Co Op Credit Society

Hearing History

Judge: 2-2nd Jt. Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC

04-04-2026

Disposed

23-03-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

09-03-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

09-02-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

12-01-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

Final Orders / Judgements

04-04-2026
Copy of Judgment

Summary The court rejected the plaintiff's plaint under Order 7 Rule 11(d) of the CPC, finding the suit is barred by the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act. The court held that disputes involving guarantors of cooperative society loans fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of cooperative courts under Section 91 and 363 of the Act, not civil courts. Additionally, the plaintiff's father had filed an identical suit in 2021 that was dismissed, and the plaintiff suppressed this fact while filing the present suit two years later. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court rejected the plaintiff's plaint under Order 7 Rule 11(d) of the CPC, finding the suit is barred by the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act. The court held that disputes involving guarantors of cooperative society loans fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of cooperative courts under Section 91 and 363 of the Act, not civil courts. Additionally, the plaintiff's father had filed an identical suit in 2021 that was dismissed, and the plaintiff suppressed this fact while filing the present suit two years later. 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 Junior Division , Rahuri All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case