Rashid Jamal Shaikh vs Arun Sadashiv Sanap — 201/2016
Case under Specific Relief Act Section 34. Status: Awaiting Summons. Next hearing: 23rd April 2026.
R.C.S. - Reg.Civil Suit
CNR: MHAH200007192016
Next Hearing
23rd April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
236/2016
Filing Date
08-06-2016
Registration No
201/2016
Registration Date
09-06-2016
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Pathardi
Judge
3-JT. CIVIL JUDGE J.D. AND J.M.F.C. PATHARDI
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Rashid Jamal Shaikh
Adv. Palwe N. R.
Hanifa Yakub Shaikh
Gajrabi Ajmoddin Shaikh
Najruddin Yusuf Shaikh
AYub Najruddin Shiakh
Mubarak Najruddin Shaikh
Munir Najruddin Shaikh
Nashir Bashir Shaikh
Najir Bashir Shaikh
Bayma Najir Pathan
Jayda Aslam Shaikh
Madbabi Dilawar Shaikh
Zumbarbi Ikbal Shaikh
Respondent(s)
Arun Sadashiv Sanap
Uday Arun Sanap
Ulhas Arun Sanap
Varsha Janardhan Wanve
Ujwala Babasaheb Chowdhar
Haji Mithubahi Bhikanbhai Shaikh
Laxman Mohiniraj Deshmukh
Rajendra Dhondiram Pawar
Navjivan Gramoday Pratisthan
Ismail Seleman Shaikh
Aaysuddin Suleman Shaikh
Sunabi Sileman Shaikh
Rubai Sileman Shaikh
Hearing History
Judge: 3-JT. CIVIL JUDGE J.D. AND J.M.F.C. PATHARDI
Awaiting Summons
Awaiting Summons
Awaiting Summons
Awaiting Summons
Awaiting Summons
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 09-03-2026 | Awaiting Summons | |
| 12-01-2026 | Awaiting Summons | |
| 05-01-2026 | Awaiting Summons | |
| 28-11-2025 | Awaiting Summons | |
| 18-09-2025 | Awaiting Summons |
Interim Orders
Summary: The court allowed defendants 8 and 9's application to file their written statement despite the delay, subject to payment of Rs. 500 as cost to the plaintiff. The court found that denying the opportunity to file would cause prejudice to the defendants whose material rights in immovable property were involved, and the plaintiff's grievance could be adequately compensated through the cost imposed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The court allowed defendants 8 and 9's application to file their written statement despite the delay, subject to payment of Rs. 500 as cost to the plaintiff. The court found that denying the opportunity to file would cause prejudice to the defendants whose material rights in immovable property were involved, and the plaintiff's grievance could be adequately compensated through the cost imposed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts