Siddharth Mahavir SPML Through P.O.A. Dellip Vijaykumar Kotecha vs Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation Through Executive Director — 1/2024

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 1. Status: Hearing. Next hearing: 24th June 2026.

Commercial Suit

CNR: MHBU040008932024

Hearing

Next Hearing

24th June 2026

e-Filing Number

02-07-2024

Filing Number

399/2024

Filing Date

03-07-2024

Registration No

1/2024

Registration Date

03-07-2024

Court

District and Session Court ,khamgaon

Judge

2-District Judge-2 and Addl. Sessions Judge, Khamgaon

Acts & Sections

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Section 1

Petitioner(s)

Siddharth Mahavir SPML Through P.O.A. Dellip Vijaykumar Kotecha

Adv. Phirke MB

Respondent(s)

Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation Through Executive Director

Executive Engineer, Jigaon Lift Irrigation Division

Adv. Banarase AS

Hearing History

Judge: 2-District Judge-2 and Addl. Sessions Judge, Khamgaon

06-05-2026

Hearing

15-04-2026

Hearing

25-03-2026

Hearing

11-03-2026

Hearing

04-02-2026

Hearing

Interim Orders

03-01-2026
Order on Exhibit

SUMMARY: The District Court of Khamgaon rejected the defendant's application seeking rejection of the plaintiff's commercial suit. The court found that although Section 12-A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 mandates pre-litigation mediation, this requirement does not apply when urgent interim relief is sought—which the plaintiff did by filing a temporary injunction application. The court held that the suit is not barred by law and dismissed the defendant's application with cost in favor of the plaintiff. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

SUMMARY: The District Court of Khamgaon rejected the defendant's application seeking rejection of the plaintiff's commercial suit. The court found that although Section 12-A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 mandates pre-litigation mediation, this requirement does not apply when urgent interim relief is sought—which the plaintiff did by filing a temporary injunction application. The court held that the suit is not barred by law and dismissed the defendant's application with cost in favor of the plaintiff. 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

District and Session Court ,khamgaon All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case