Narayan Balu Ghanwat vs Rajaram Yashvant Ghanwat — 284/2021
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 9,. Status: Evidence Part Heard. Next hearing: 24th April 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHAH230007672021
Next Hearing
24th April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
621/2021
Filing Date
17-09-2021
Registration No
284/2021
Registration Date
17-09-2021
Court
Civil Court Senior Division, Shrigonda
Judge
3-2nd- Jt Civil Judge S D Shrigonda
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Narayan Balu Ghanwat
Adv. Bhos B. S.
Respondent(s)
Rajaram Yashvant Ghanwat
Sandip Anna Ghanwat
Adv. Kshirsagar P. B.
Dada Anna Ghanwat
Adv. Kshirsagar P. B.
Yuvraj Anna Ghanwat
Adv. Kshirsagar P. B.
Hearing History
Judge: 3-2nd- Jt Civil Judge S D Shrigonda
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 25-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 09-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 13-02-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 16-01-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 15-01-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
Interim Orders
Summary: The court rejected the plaintiff's application for temporary injunction seeking to restrain the defendant from alienating suit property. The court found the plaintiff lacked a prima facie case, as he failed to produce documentary evidence supporting his claim of a joint family with his brother or that the property was purchased from joint family income. Since the property was purchased by Vithabai (the defendant's mother) through a registered sale deed in her individual capacity, she had full authority to gift it to the defendant, and no injunction could be granted against the true owner. Cost awarded against the plaintiff. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The court rejected the plaintiff's application for temporary injunction seeking to restrain the defendant from alienating suit property. The court found the plaintiff lacked a prima facie case, as he failed to produce documentary evidence supporting his claim of a joint family with his brother or that the property was purchased from joint family income. Since the property was purchased by Vithabai (the defendant's mother) through a registered sale deed in her individual capacity, she had full authority to gift it to the defendant, and no injunction could be granted against the true owner. Cost awarded against 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