Devkabai Subhash Dobale vs Kamalbai Bhikaji Dhande Advocate - Tawari ML — 27/2017
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 2. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 27th March 2026.
R.C.S. - Reg.Civil Suit
CNR: MHBU080020962016
Filing Number
68/2017
Filing Date
27-06-2017
Registration No
27/2017
Registration Date
27-06-2017
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , nandura
Judge
1-Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Nandura
Decision Date
27th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Devkabai Subhash Dobale
Adv. Banait PS
Govinda Pundlik Dobale
Respondent(s)
Kamalbai Bhikaji Dhande Advocate - Tawari ML
Ashok Bhikaji Dhande
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Nandura
Disposed
Citation
Citation
Arguments
Arguments
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 27-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 24-03-2026 | Citation |
| 18-03-2026 | Citation |
| 11-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 18-02-2026 | Arguments |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary The court dismissed the plaintiffs' suit seeking a declaration that no pathway exists through their agricultural properties and an injunction to prevent the defendants from creating access. The judge found that the plaintiffs failed to prove the alleged incidents of fence destruction on 10/06/2017 and 15/06/2017, and that evidence showed the defendants had been using a long-standing pathway through the suit properties for agricultural access. The court also held that the plaintiffs' testimony lacked credibility due to inconsistencies and their failure to examine critical witnesses from adjacent land, while the defendants' evidence of continuous user for over 20 years remained unchallenged. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Case Summary The court dismissed the plaintiffs' suit seeking a declaration that no pathway exists through their agricultural properties and an injunction to prevent the defendants from creating access. The judge found that the plaintiffs failed to prove the alleged incidents of fence destruction on 10/06/2017 and 15/06/2017, and that evidence showed the defendants had been using a long-standing pathway through the suit properties for agricultural access. The court also held that the plaintiffs' testimony lacked credibility due to inconsistencies and their failure to examine critical witnesses from adjacent land, while the defendants' evidence of continuous user for over 20 years remained unchallenged. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts