Ambadas Tulshiram Pachange. vs Balaji @ Balasaheb Sansthan, Wankhed Through Ratanlal Sukhdev Chandak. — 62/2024
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 2. Status: Issues. Next hearing: 08th July 2026.
R.C.S. - Reg.Civil Suit
CNR: MHBU180010022024
Next Hearing
08th July 2026
Filing Number
227/2024
Filing Date
24-10-2024
Registration No
62/2024
Registration Date
24-10-2024
Court
Civil and Criminal Court , Sangrampur
Judge
1-Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and JMFC
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Ambadas Tulshiram Pachange.
Adv. Wankhade VP
Rameshwari Devidas Pachange.
Satyabhama Subhash Hande.
Sharda Raanjaji Gite.
Sangita Digambar Wairagade.
Gokula Amol Pendhari.
Shyamkarna Santosh Zatole.
Goukarna Tulshiram Pachange.
Rukma Tulshiram Pachange.
Respondent(s)
Balaji @ Balasaheb Sansthan, Wankhed Through Ratanlal Sukhdev Chandak.
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and JMFC
Issues
Issues
Written Statement
Written Statement
Order on Exh
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 29-04-2026 | Issues |
| 11-03-2026 | Issues |
| 10-02-2026 | Written Statement |
| 06-01-2026 | Written Statement |
| 03-12-2025 | Order on Exh |
Interim Orders
Summary: The Civil Judge rejected the defendant's application to dismiss the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 of the CPC. The court found that while the suit involved agricultural land, the plaintiffs sought only a perpetual injunction to restrain interference with their possession—not a declaration of tenancy rights—and therefore Section 124 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act 1948 did not bar the suit. The suit is permitted to proceed further. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The Civil Judge rejected the defendant's application to dismiss the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 of the CPC. The court found that while the suit involved agricultural land, the plaintiffs sought only a perpetual injunction to restrain interference with their possession—not a declaration of tenancy rights—and therefore Section 124 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act 1948 did not bar the suit. The suit is permitted to proceed further. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts