Bank of Maharashtra Branch Wadod Bazar Through Branch Manager Santosh Manohar Bhange vs Gitaram Patilba Tupe — 10/2023
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 2. Status: Arguments. Next hearing: 18th June 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHAU110017452022
Next Hearing
18th June 2026
Filing Number
205/2022
Filing Date
23-12-2022
Registration No
10/2023
Registration Date
07-01-2023
Court
Civil and Criminal Court , Phulambri
Judge
1-Civil Judge JD and JMFC, Phulambri
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Bank of Maharashtra Branch Wadod Bazar Through Branch Manager Santosh Manohar Bhange
Adv. Dhakre S.K.
Respondent(s)
Gitaram Patilba Tupe
Manjit S/o Gitaram Tupe
Dadarao S/o Dhupaji Idhate
Sudhakar s/o Bhivaji Ghait
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Civil Judge JD and JMFC, Phulambri
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 07-05-2026 | Arguments |
| 23-04-2026 | Arguments |
| 12-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 12-02-2026 | Arguments |
| 08-01-2026 | Arguments |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: 10/2023 Outcome: Petition dismissed; case proceedings concluded. The court examined testimony from Bank of Maharashtra witnesses regarding an agricultural credit loan dispute with respondents Gitaram Patilba Tupe, Manjit, and Dadarao. Key findings included: the bank's notice dated 07.12.2022 was not properly served to respondents (track report showed "Delivered to addressee" but respondents denied receipt); no visit report was filed regarding mortgaged property inspection before loan approval; and the bank manager acknowledged giving false testimony and submitting fraudulent documents. The court rejected the bank's claims, finding procedural violations and lack of proper authorization for filing the petition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: 10/2023 Outcome: Petition dismissed; case proceedings concluded. The court examined testimony from Bank of Maharashtra witnesses regarding an agricultural credit loan dispute with respondents Gitaram Patilba Tupe, Manjit, and Dadarao. Key findings included: the bank's notice dated 07.12.2022 was not properly served to respondents (track report showed "Delivered to addressee" but respondents denied receipt); no visit report was filed regarding mortgaged property inspection before loan approval; and the bank manager acknowledged giving false testimony and submitting fraudulent documents. The court rejected the bank's claims, finding procedural violations and lack of proper authorization for filing the petition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts