Narendra So Pundlikrao Sapkal vs Municipal Corporation, Aurangabad Advocate - Wasadikar J.K. — 4/2026
Case under Specific Relief Act Section Section34. Status: Issues. Next hearing: 24th June 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHAU130000182026
Next Hearing
24th June 2026
e-Filing Number
02-02-2026
Filing Number
18/2026
Filing Date
02-02-2026
Registration No
4/2026
Registration Date
02-02-2026
Court
Corporation Court, Aurangabad
Judge
1-CIVIL JUDGE S.D., CORPORATION COURT, AURANGABAD
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Narendra So Pundlikrao Sapkal
Adv. Mehta P.S.
Jyoti Narendra Sapkal
Adv. Punit Mehta
Respondent(s)
Municipal Corporation, Aurangabad Advocate - Wasadikar J.K.
Hearing History
Judge: 1-CIVIL JUDGE S.D., CORPORATION COURT, AURANGABAD
Issues
Issues
Order on Exh
Order on Exh
Order on Exh
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 16-04-2026 | Issues |
| 12-03-2026 | Issues |
| 04-03-2026 | Order on Exh |
| 25-02-2026 | Order on Exh |
| 20-02-2026 | Order on Exh |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: RCS No. 4/2026 Narendra So Pundlikrao Sapkal v. Municipal Corporation, Aurangabad The court rejected the plaintiffs' application for temporary injunction to prevent demolition of unauthorized construction. The plaintiffs had permission for a G+1 building but constructed G+2 instead. Though they claimed deemed permission under Section 45 of the MRTP Act (1966), the court found no prima facie case since the demolition notice preceded their permission application by two days. The balance of convenience favored the corporation's statutory demolition powers. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: RCS No. 4/2026 Narendra So Pundlikrao Sapkal v. Municipal Corporation, Aurangabad The court rejected the plaintiffs' application for temporary injunction to prevent demolition of unauthorized construction. The plaintiffs had permission for a G+1 building but constructed G+2 instead. Though they claimed deemed permission under Section 45 of the MRTP Act (1966), the court found no prima facie case since the demolition notice preceded their permission application by two days. The balance of convenience favored the corporation's statutory demolition powers. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts