Dadasaheb Rabhaji Sonavane vs Babasaheb Bhausaheb Sonavane Alias Ghansham Alias Babasaheb Rabhaji Sonavane Advocate - NIL — 476/2024
Case under Specific Relief Act Section 36,. Status: Argument on Exh.____Unready. Next hearing: 27th April 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHAH180026282024
Next Hearing
27th April 2026
e-Filing Number
23-10-2024
Filing Number
559/2024
Filing Date
24-10-2024
Registration No
476/2024
Registration Date
24-10-2024
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Rahuri
Judge
2-2nd Jt. Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Dadasaheb Rabhaji Sonavane
Adv. Kadam S. A.
Gopinath Rabhaji Sonavane
Adv. Singh Ashish A.
Manisha Vijay Bhavar
Adv. Singh Ashish A.
Sunita Anil Pawar
Adv. Singh Ashish A.
Anita Shrikant Gavde
Adv. Singh Ashish A.
Suman Rabhaji Sonavane
Adv. Singh Ashish A.
Respondent(s)
Babasaheb Bhausaheb Sonavane Alias Ghansham Alias Babasaheb Rabhaji Sonavane Advocate - NIL
Shalan Dada Bhujadi Alias Mathurabai Rabhaji Sonavane
Adv. NIL
Hearing History
Judge: 2-2nd Jt. Civil Judge J.D. And JMFC
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 07-04-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready | |
| 23-03-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready | |
| 17-03-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready | |
| 09-03-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready | |
| 24-02-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
Interim Orders
Summary: The application filed by defendants no. 1 and 2 to set aside the "no written statement" (no WS) order has been allowed. The court permitted the defendants to file their written statement on record despite the delay, as the suit involves a perpetual injunction claim where both parties should have an opportunity to be heard on merit. The defendants are required to pay costs of Rs. 300 to the plaintiff. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The application filed by defendants no. 1 and 2 to set aside the "no written statement" (no WS) order has been allowed. The court permitted the defendants to file their written statement on record despite the delay, as the suit involves a perpetual injunction claim where both parties should have an opportunity to be heard on merit. The defendants are required to pay costs of Rs. 300 to the plaintiff. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts