Shaikh Burakhbi Shaikh Isaq vs Bhausaheb Sarjerao Jadhav Advocate - Jadhav N.G. — 1600019/2009
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section SuitforPrepetualInjunction. Disposed: Contested--DECREED AFTER FULL TRIAL on 10th April 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHBI150000962009
Filing Number
1600019/2009
Filing Date
20-02-2009
Registration No
1600019/2009
Registration Date
20-02-2009
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Patoda
Judge
1-C.J.J.D. AND J.M.F.C. PATODA.
Decision Date
10th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DECREED AFTER FULL TRIAL
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Shaikh Burakhbi Shaikh Isaq
Adv. Vaidya A.S.
Respondent(s)
Bhausaheb Sarjerao Jadhav Advocate - Jadhav N.G.
Kashinath Sarjerao Jadhav
Adv. Jadhav N.G.
Sarjerao Laxman Jadhav
Adv. Jadhav N.G.
Vishnu Mahada Jadhav
Adv. Jadhav N.G.
Laxmibai Sadashiv Jadhav
Adv. Jadhav N.G.
Hearing History
Judge: 1-C.J.J.D. AND J.M.F.C. PATODA.
Disposed
Judgment
Defence Evidence
Defence Evidence
Defence Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 10-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 31-03-2026 | Judgment |
| 30-03-2026 | Defence Evidence |
| 25-03-2026 | Defence Evidence |
| 12-03-2026 | Defence Evidence |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The Court of Civil Judge Junior Division, Patoda (Beed District) decreed the plaintiff's suit for perpetual injunction, finding that the plaintiff had established lawful possession over the disputed agricultural properties (Survey Nos. 33/2 and 33/3/A) through a registered sale deed dated 31.01.1984 and that the defendants unlawfully obstructed her peaceful possession on 19.02.2009. The court rejected the defendants' counterclaim that the suit was false and vexatious, granting a perpetual injunction restraining defendants from interfering with the plaintiff's possession without due process of law. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Summary The Court of Civil Judge Junior Division, Patoda (Beed District) decreed the plaintiff's suit for perpetual injunction, finding that the plaintiff had established lawful possession over the disputed agricultural properties (Survey Nos. 33/2 and 33/3/A) through a registered sale deed dated 31.01.1984 and that the defendants unlawfully obstructed her peaceful possession on 19.02.2009. The court rejected the defendants' counterclaim that the suit was false and vexatious, granting a perpetual injunction restraining defendants from interfering with the plaintiff's possession without due process of law. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts