Ramdas Dayaram Bathe(Legal Heir) vs Vishnu Raoji Bathe Advocate - Tawari ML — 6/2020
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 96. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 11th March 2026.
R.C.A. - Civil Appeal
CNR: MHBU110001302020
Filing Number
24/2020
Filing Date
27-02-2020
Registration No
6/2020
Registration Date
27-02-2020
Court
District and Sessions Judge, Malkapur
Judge
1-District Judge-1 Addl. Sess. Judge
Decision Date
11th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Ramdas Dayaram Bathe(Legal Heir)
Adv. Jain IF
Respondent(s)
Vishnu Raoji Bathe Advocate - Tawari ML
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Judge-1 Addl. Sess. Judge
Disposed
Judgment
Arguments
Arguments
Dismissal Order
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 11-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 25-02-2026 | Judgment |
| 11-02-2026 | Arguments |
| 14-01-2026 | Arguments |
| 17-12-2025 | Dismissal Order |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The District Court dismissed plaintiff Ramdas Bathe's appeal against the lower court's partial decree in a property dispute over a disputed 4-foot road. The court found that Ramdas failed to prove the defendant constructed a bathroom on the disputed road, as there was no expert measurement or survey evidence to establish property boundaries. Additionally, the court held that Ramdas lacked standing to claim rights over the road, which was described in the sale deed as being for use by his brother, not himself. The court set aside the lower court's injunction order and dismissed the entire suit, directing parties to bear their own costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The District Court dismissed plaintiff Ramdas Bathe's appeal against the lower court's partial decree in a property dispute over a disputed 4-foot road. The court found that Ramdas failed to prove the defendant constructed a bathroom on the disputed road, as there was no expert measurement or survey evidence to establish property boundaries. Additionally, the court held that Ramdas lacked standing to claim rights over the road, which was described in the sale deed as being for use by his brother, not himself. The court set aside the lower court's injunction order and dismissed the entire suit, directing parties to bear their own costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts