Vividh Karyakari Sanstha Sultanpur vs Damodhar Sitaram Surushe — 6/2025
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 104. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING on 29th April 2026.
M.C.A. - Misc.Civil Appeal
CNR: MHBU200003752025
e-Filing Number
08-05-2025
Filing Number
126/2025
Filing Date
09-May-2025
Registration No
6/2025
Registration Date
09-May-2025
Court
District Court and Addl.Sessions Court, Mehkar
Judge
1-District Judge-1 and Additional Sess.Judge
Decision Date
29-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING
Last updated 20-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Vividh Karyakari Sanstha Sultanpur
Adv. Dhondge KS
-
2.Vividh Karyakari Sanstha Sultanpur
Respondent(s)
-
1.Damodhar Sitaram Surushe
-
2.Madhukar Sheshrao Khetre
-
3.Pandurang Sahebrao Gadekar
-
4.Baban Sakharam Bidve
-
5.Gajanan Kisan Jhore
-
6.Santosh Uttam Surushe
-
7.Pradeep Sukhahari Gadekar
-
8.Rajesh Devidas Patil
-
9.Fulchand Dasrath Shirale
-
10.Sarpanch Gram Panchayat
-
11.Sub Sarpanch Gram Panchayat
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
29-Apr-2026
Copy of JudgmentView PDF
Summary The District Judge of Mehkar set aside the lower court's temporary injunction order, finding that shop owners (plaintiffs) failed to prove prima facie possession of the disputed land and had concealed material facts. The court determined the plaintiffs were encroachers on land belonging to a registered agricultural society and upheld the society's right to construct a new building on its own property (Survey No. 626), rejecting the injunction application with costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
29-Apr-2026
Disposed
District Judge-1 and Additional Sess.Judge
-
18-Apr-2026
Citation
District Judge-1 and Additional Sess.Judge
-
01-Apr-2026
Citation
District Judge-1 and Additional Sess.Judge
-
25-Mar-2026
Citation
District Judge-1 and Additional Sess.Judge
-
11-Mar-2026
Citation
District Judge-1 and Additional Sess.Judge
-
04-Mar-2026
Citation
District Judge-1 and Additional Sess.Judge
-
20-Feb-2026
Citation
District Judge-1 and Additional Sess.Judge
-
18-Feb-2026
Hearing
District Judge-1 and Additional Sess.Judge
-
11-Feb-2026
Hearing
District Judge-1 and Additional Sess.Judge
-
30-Jan-2026
Hearing
District Judge-1 and Additional Sess.Judge
-
19-Jan-2026
Hearing
District Judge-1 and Additional Sess.Judge
-
05-Jan-2026
Reply/Say
District Judge-1 and Additional Sess.Judge
-
19-Dec-2025
Reply/Say
District Judge-1 and Additional Sess.Judge
-
05-Dec-2025
Reply/Say
District Judge-1 and Additional Sess.Judge
-
07-Nov-2025
Reply/Say
District Judge-1 and Additional Sess.Judge
-
16-Oct-2025
Reply/Say
District Judge-1 and Additional Sess.Judge
-
06-Oct-2025
Reply/Say
District Judge-1 and Additional Sess.Judge
-
17-Sep-2025
Reply/Say
District Judge-1 and Additional Sess.Judge
-
02-Sep-2025
Reply/Say
District Judge-1 and Additional Sess.Judge
-
11-Aug-2025
W.S. and Say
District Judge-1 and Additional Sess.Judge
-
23-Jul-2025
W.S. and Say
District Judge-1 and Additional Sess.Judge
-
09-Jul-2025
W.S. and Say
District Judge-1 and Additional Sess.Judge
-
25-Jun-2025
W.S. and Say
District Judge-2 and Additional Sess.Judge
-
13-Jun-2025
W.S. and Say
District Judge-2 and Additional Sess.Judge
-
09-May-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
09-May-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 6/2025
Summary The District Judge of Mehkar set aside the lower court's temporary injunction order, finding that shop owners (plaintiffs) failed to prove prima facie possession of the disputed land and had concealed material facts. The court determined the plaintiffs were encroachers on land belonging to a registered agricultural society and upheld the society's right to construct a new building on its own property (Survey No. 626), rejecting the injunction application with costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts