Sau Janki Milind Asarkar vs Sarpanch Gat Grampanchayat Sawargaon — 191/2025

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section O4,R2. Status: Issues. Next hearing: 10th April 2026.

R.C.S. - Reg.Civil Suit

CNR: MHAK060036932025

Issues

Next Hearing

10th April 2026

e-Filing Number

19-12-2025

Filing Number

1045/2025

Filing Date

23-12-2025

Registration No

191/2025

Registration Date

24-12-2025

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Akot

Judge

3-2nd Jt. Civil Judge J.D. J.M.F.C. Akot

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section O4,R2

Petitioner(s)

Sau Janki Milind Asarkar

Adv. KUTE DEEPAK MADHUKAR

Respondent(s)

Sarpanch Gat Grampanchayat Sawargaon

Sachiv Gat Grampanchayat Sawargaon

Pankaj Rameshwar Kolkhede

Hearing History

Judge: 3-2nd Jt. Civil Judge J.D. J.M.F.C. Akot

23-03-2026

Issues

20-03-2026

Argument on Exh.____Ready

18-03-2026

Argument on Exh.____Ready

17-03-2026

Argument on Exh.____Ready

16-03-2026

Argument on Exh.____Ready

Interim Orders

23-03-2026
Order on Exhibit

Summary The court granted the plaintiff's application for temporary injunction under Order XXXIX Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The defendants (village panchayat officials) are restrained from disturbing the plaintiff's peaceful possession of her agricultural land (4 hectare 38 are) until final disposal of the suit, despite a revenue order allegedly reserving 5 are for village crematorium. The court found the plaintiff has a prima facie case with balance of convenience in her favor, as the earlier 1982 acquisition order was cancelled and no valid substantive document authorizes the crematorium reservation on her private property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court granted the plaintiff's application for temporary injunction under Order XXXIX Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The defendants (village panchayat officials) are restrained from disturbing the plaintiff's peaceful possession of her agricultural land (4 hectare 38 are) until final disposal of the suit, despite a revenue order allegedly reserving 5 are for village crematorium. The court found the plaintiff has a prima facie case with balance of convenience in her favor, as the earlier 1982 acquisition order was cancelled and no valid substantive document authorizes the crematorium reservation on her private property. 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 , Akot All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case