Kailas Ganpat Jadhav vs Karbhari Ganpat Jadhav Advocate - Dhivar N.B. — 134/2022
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 39. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 22nd June 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHAU100008872022
Next Hearing
22nd June 2026
Filing Number
240/2022
Filing Date
12-10-2022
Registration No
134/2022
Registration Date
12-10-2022
Court
Civil and Criminal Court, Khultabad
Judge
1-JT. CIVIL JUDGE JD AND JMFC KHULTABAD
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Kailas Ganpat Jadhav
Adv. Kale D.P.
Respondent(s)
Karbhari Ganpat Jadhav Advocate - Dhivar N.B.
Hearing History
Judge: 1-JT. CIVIL JUDGE JD AND JMFC KHULTABAD
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Dismissal Order
Dismissal Order
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 12-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 26-02-2026 | Evidence |
| 19-12-2025 | Evidence |
| 26-11-2025 | Dismissal Order |
| 30-10-2025 | Dismissal Order |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: 134/2022 Petitioner: Kailas Ganpat Jadhav Respondent: Karbhari Ganpat Jadhav Outcome: The petitioner's application for interim relief (temporary injunction) was GRANTED. The court ordered that the respondent must not create obstruction to the petitioner's possession and enjoyment of 40 acres of agricultural land (specifically described as part of a 80-acre plot in Khultabad, Aurangabad district). Key Finding: The court determined that the disputed land is jointly owned ancestral property belonging to both petitioner and respondent as members of the same family, and that a partition deed allegedly issued by the respondent in 2010 lacks legal validity and cannot be recognized as creating distinct ownership rights. Costs to be determined at final judgment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: 134/2022 Petitioner: Kailas Ganpat Jadhav Respondent: Karbhari Ganpat Jadhav Outcome: The petitioner's application for interim relief (temporary injunction) was GRANTED. The court ordered that the respondent must not create obstruction to the petitioner's possession and enjoyment of 40 acres of agricultural land (specifically described as part of a 80-acre plot in Khultabad, Aurangabad district). Key Finding: The court determined that the disputed land is jointly owned ancestral property belonging to both petitioner and respondent as members of the same family, and that a partition deed allegedly issued by the respondent in 2010 lacks legal validity and cannot be recognized as creating distinct ownership rights. Costs to be determined at final judgment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts