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

Issues

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

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Section 2

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

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

06-01-2026
Order on Exhibit

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.

casestatus.in Summary

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

More from this court

Civil and Criminal Court , Sangrampur All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case