Ragunath Trimbak Sonwane vs Vitthal Dasrath Mhaske Advocate - Dhakre S.K. — 67/2017
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 7. Status: Argument on Exh.____Ready. Next hearing: 20th June 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHAU110005882017
Next Hearing
20th June 2026
Filing Number
95/2017
Filing Date
10-07-2017
Registration No
67/2017
Registration Date
10-07-2017
Court
Civil and Criminal Court , Phulambri
Judge
2-Jt. Civil Judge JD and JMFC, Phulambri
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Ragunath Trimbak Sonwane
Adv. Gaikwad S.S.
Respondent(s)
Vitthal Dasrath Mhaske Advocate - Dhakre S.K.
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Jt. Civil Judge JD and JMFC, Phulambri
Argument on Exh.____Ready
Argument on Exh.____Ready
Argument on Exh.____Ready
Argument on Exh.____Ready
Argument on Exh.____Ready
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 28-04-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Ready |
| 12-03-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Ready |
| 21-02-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Ready |
| 27-01-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Ready |
| 01-01-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Ready |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: RCS 67/2017 Petitioner: Ragunath Trimbak Sonwane Respondent: Vitthal Dasrath Mhaske & Others Outcome: The application for temporary injunction was allowed. The court restrained the defendants and anyone acting on their behalf from causing obstruction and interference in the plaintiff's peaceful possession of the suit land (Gut No. 494, Umrawati village, Aurangabad) until disposal of the main suit. The court found the plaintiff had established a prima facie case based on his registered sale deed and 7/12 land records, determined the balance of convenience favored him, and concluded he would suffer irreparable loss if the injunction were not granted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: RCS 67/2017 Petitioner: Ragunath Trimbak Sonwane Respondent: Vitthal Dasrath Mhaske & Others Outcome: The application for temporary injunction was allowed. The court restrained the defendants and anyone acting on their behalf from causing obstruction and interference in the plaintiff's peaceful possession of the suit land (Gut No. 494, Umrawati village, Aurangabad) until disposal of the main suit. The court found the plaintiff had established a prima facie case based on his registered sale deed and 7/12 land records, determined the balance of convenience favored him, and concluded he would suffer irreparable loss if the injunction were not granted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts