Ravsaheb Haribhau Wagh vs Vitthal Manikarao Wagh Advocate - Pandit M.S. — 226/2025
Case under Specific Relief Act Section 34,37,39. Status: W.S. and Say. Next hearing: 08th June 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHAU080022492025
Next Hearing
08th June 2026
e-Filing Number
11-08-2025
Filing Number
918/2025
Filing Date
14-08-2025
Registration No
226/2025
Registration Date
16-08-2025
Court
Civil and Criminal Court, Sillod
Judge
6-IIIRD JT CJJD AND JMFC SILLOD
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Ravsaheb Haribhau Wagh
Adv. Deshpande A.V.
Sakhubai Haribhau Wagh
Adv. Deshpande A.V.
Respondent(s)
Vitthal Manikarao Wagh Advocate - Pandit M.S.
Sudhakar Vitthal Wagh
Vinayak Vitthal Wagh
Dnyaneshwar Vitthal Wagh
Kailas Vitthal Wagh
Suman Vitthal Wagh
Sheshrao Manikrao Wagh
Chandrakala Sheshrao Wagh
Rahul Sheshrao Wagh
Prabhu Manikrao Wagh
Vandana Prabhu Wagh
Nilesh Prabhu Wagh
Hearing History
Judge: 6-IIIRD JT CJJD AND JMFC SILLOD
W.S. and Say
W.S. and Say
W.S. and Say
W.S. and Say
W.S. and Say
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 04-05-2026 | W.S. and Say |
| 13-04-2026 | W.S. and Say |
| 12-03-2026 | W.S. and Say |
| 23-02-2026 | W.S. and Say |
| 29-01-2026 | W.S. and Say |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: 226/2025 The court allowed the defendants' application to set aside a No Written Statement (W.S.) order previously passed against Defendant Nos. 1, 3, 5-12. The defendants argued delay in receiving material documents prevented timely filing, while the plaintiff opposed, claiming the application was frivolous. The court found that allowing defendants to decide the suit on merit would not prejudice the plaintiff. Accordingly, the No W.S. order was set aside subject to payment of Rs. 200/- cost to Taluka Legal Aid. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: 226/2025 The court allowed the defendants' application to set aside a No Written Statement (W.S.) order previously passed against Defendant Nos. 1, 3, 5-12. The defendants argued delay in receiving material documents prevented timely filing, while the plaintiff opposed, claiming the application was frivolous. The court found that allowing defendants to decide the suit on merit would not prejudice the plaintiff. Accordingly, the No W.S. order was set aside subject to payment of Rs. 200/- cost to Taluka Legal Aid. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts