Tai Dhananjay Dindore vs Dagadu Machhindra Kharat Advocate - Kshirsagar B. P. — 200233/2024

Case under Specific Relief Act Section 34,38. Status: Issues. Next hearing: 23rd June 2026.

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHAH220013872024

Issues

Next Hearing

23rd June 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

499/2024

Filing Date

03-09-2024

Registration No

200233/2024

Registration Date

05-09-2024

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Karjat

Judge

6-JT.CIVIL JUDGEJ.D. J.M.F.C.KARJATA'NAGAR

Acts & Sections

Specific Relief Act Section 34,38

Petitioner(s)

Tai Dhananjay Dindore

Adv. Anbhule J. S.

Dhananjay Gorakh Dindore

Adv. Anbhule J. S.

Respondent(s)

Dagadu Machhindra Kharat Advocate - Kshirsagar B. P.

Raju Baban Shinde

Vikas Raju Rakshe

Dnyandev Bhaguji Bhise

Nitin Bapu Bhise

Aaba Nana Ughade

Vijay Uttam Mane

Jalindar Bhanudas Pawar

Bhanudas Ekanath Pawar

Gramvikas Adhikari,Grampanchayat Rakshaswadi Bk.

Hearing History

Judge: 6-JT.CIVIL JUDGEJ.D. J.M.F.C.KARJATA'NAGAR

01-04-2026

Issues

25-03-2026

Order on Exh

23-03-2026

Order on Exh

16-03-2026

Citation

09-03-2026

Filing of Say on Exh___Unready

Interim Orders

01-04-2026
Order on T.I.

Summary The court rejected all three interim injunction applications (Exh.5, 7, and 32) filed by plaintiffs Tai Dhananjay Dindore and spouse in their dispute over Grampanchayat property no.475 in Ahmednagar. The court found that the plaintiffs failed to establish a prima facie case of ownership and possession, noting they were not in physical possession of the property and that the property's status had allegedly changed through construction of shops before the suit was filed. Consequently, the applications for interim prohibitory injunction to restrain defendants from creating interests in the property, obstructing possession, or continuing construction were dismissed, with costs in the main cause. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court rejected all three interim injunction applications (Exh.5, 7, and 32) filed by plaintiffs Tai Dhananjay Dindore and spouse in their dispute over Grampanchayat property no.475 in Ahmednagar. The court found that the plaintiffs failed to establish a prima facie case of ownership and possession, noting they were not in physical possession of the property and that the property's status had allegedly changed through construction of shops before the suit was filed. Consequently, the applications for interim prohibitory injunction to restrain defendants from creating interests in the property, obstructing possession, or continuing construction were dismissed, with costs in the main cause. 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 , Karjat All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case