Subhash Sukdeo Patil vs Subhash Dyaram Patil — 116/2023

Case under Specific Relief Act Section 34,37(02),38. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 16th July 2026.

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHAU120002782023

Evidence

Next Hearing

16th July 2026

Filing Number

140/2023

Filing Date

29-03-2023

Registration No

116/2023

Registration Date

29-03-2023

Court

Civil and Criminal Court , Soygaon

Judge

1-CIVIL JUDGE J.D. J.M.F.C. SOYGAON

Acts & Sections

Specific Relief Act Section 34,37(02),38

Petitioner(s)

Subhash Sukdeo Patil

Adv. Mahajan R.S.

Respondent(s)

Subhash Dyaram Patil

Sumanbai Subhash Patil

Yogesh Subhash Patil

Pankaj Subhash Patil

Ketan Shivaji Patil

Samir Shivaji Patil

Ashabai Shivaji Patil

Hearing History

Judge: 1-CIVIL JUDGE J.D. J.M.F.C. SOYGAON

24-04-2026

Evidence

12-03-2026

Evidence

21-01-2026

Issues

08-12-2025

Issues

08-10-2025

Issues

Interim Orders

16-03-2024
Order on T.I.

Case Summary: 116/2023 Petitioner: Subhash Sukdeo Patil Respondents: Subhash Dyaram Patil, Sumanbai Subhash Patil, Yogesh Subhash Patil Outcome: The petitioner's application for temporary injunction was dismissed. The court found that the petitioner failed to establish prima facie case or balance of convenience in his favor regarding disputed agricultural land in Mokhed, Aurangabad. The court rejected the petitioner's claims regarding obstruction of a bullock cart path and illegal moneylending transactions, determining that respondents hold valid sale deeds establishing ownership of the contested property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 116/2023 Petitioner: Subhash Sukdeo Patil Respondents: Subhash Dyaram Patil, Sumanbai Subhash Patil, Yogesh Subhash Patil Outcome: The petitioner's application for temporary injunction was dismissed. The court found that the petitioner failed to establish prima facie case or balance of convenience in his favor regarding disputed agricultural land in Mokhed, Aurangabad. The court rejected the petitioner's claims regarding obstruction of a bullock cart path and illegal moneylending transactions, determining that respondents hold valid sale deeds establishing ownership of the contested 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 and Criminal Court , Soygaon All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case