Vasudev Pandri Bhagat vs Radhesham Maganlal Agrawal Advocate - Tarkase S. R. — 46/2023
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 151. Status: Order on Exh. Next hearing: 16th June 2026.
R.C.S. - Reg.Civil Suit
CNR: MHBU100008612023
Next Hearing
16th June 2026
e-Filing Number
17-06-2023
Filing Number
129/2023
Filing Date
21-06-2023
Registration No
46/2023
Registration Date
21-06-2023
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Malkapur
Judge
2-2nd Jt. Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C.
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Vasudev Pandri Bhagat
Adv. Kulkarni SG
Respondent(s)
Radhesham Maganlal Agrawal Advocate - Tarkase S. R.
Hearing History
Judge: 2-2nd Jt. Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C.
Order on Exh
Order on Exh
Order on Exh
Order on Exh
Order on Exh
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 30-04-2026 | Order on Exh |
| 18-04-2026 | Order on Exh |
| 31-03-2026 | Order on Exh |
| 11-03-2026 | Order on Exh |
| 04-03-2026 | Order on Exh |
Interim Orders
Summary: The court partially allowed the defendant's application for rejection of the plaint based on insufficient court fees. The plaintiff, seeking a declaration of title by adverse possession and perpetual injunction over a residential property valued at Rs. 5,10,750, had paid only Rs. 400 in court fees when Rs. 7,690 was required (one-half of ad valorem fee under Section 6(iv)(d) of Maharashtra Court Fees Act). The court directed the plaintiff to pay the deficit amount of Rs. 7,490 before the next date, failing which the plaint would be rejected. The suit was found maintainable before the court as the valuation for jurisdictional purposes was Rs. 2,55,375, within the court's pecuniary jurisdiction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The court partially allowed the defendant's application for rejection of the plaint based on insufficient court fees. The plaintiff, seeking a declaration of title by adverse possession and perpetual injunction over a residential property valued at Rs. 5,10,750, had paid only Rs. 400 in court fees when Rs. 7,690 was required (one-half of ad valorem fee under Section 6(iv)(d) of Maharashtra Court Fees Act). The court directed the plaintiff to pay the deficit amount of Rs. 7,490 before the next date, failing which the plaint would be rejected. The suit was found maintainable before the court as the valuation for jurisdictional purposes was Rs. 2,55,375, within the court's pecuniary jurisdiction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts