ABHINANDAN INDARCHAND SURANA vs SANTOSHKUMAR GENDULAL SURANA — 9/2025

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section -. Status: Argument on Exh.____Unready. Next hearing: 19th June 2026.

Spl.C.S. - Spl.Civ.Suit

CNR: MHBU210001542025

Argument on Exh.____Unready

Next Hearing

19th June 2026

e-Filing Number

21-02-2025

Filing Number

147/2025

Filing Date

21-02-2025

Registration No

9/2025

Registration Date

21-02-2025

Court

Civil Judge Sr.Dn., Mehkar

Judge

1-CIVIL JUDGE SENIOR DIVISION

Acts & Sections

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Section -

Petitioner(s)

ABHINANDAN INDARCHAND SURANA

Adv. Rathi OG

Respondent(s)

SANTOSHKUMAR GENDULAL SURANA

INDARCHAND GENDULAL SURANA

SMT LATABAI JAYCHAND SURANA

ATUL JAYCHAND SURANA

SIDDHARTH ALIAS VIPUL JAYCHAND SURANA

RITESH INDARCHAND SURANA

THE AKOLA JANATA COMMERCIAL CO OP BANK LTD AKOLA BRANCH LONAR

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR

THE TAHSILDAR LONAR

Hearing History

Judge: 1-CIVIL JUDGE SENIOR DIVISION

04-05-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

16-04-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

23-03-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

11-03-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

16-02-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

Interim Orders

05-02-2026
Order on Exhibit

Summary: In Special Civil Suit No. 9/2025, the court granted a status-quo order against defendants No. 7, 8, and 9, restraining them from taking possession of the suit property till the next hearing date. The judge found that the plaintiff had apprehension of dispossession and was in actual possession, and rejecting the defendant's argument that no fresh status-quo should be granted, held it justified to maintain the existing order to prevent loss and complications to the plaintiff pending final arguments. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: In Special Civil Suit No. 9/2025, the court granted a status-quo order against defendants No. 7, 8, and 9, restraining them from taking possession of the suit property till the next hearing date. The judge found that the plaintiff had apprehension of dispossession and was in actual possession, and rejecting the defendant's argument that no fresh status-quo should be granted, held it justified to maintain the existing order to prevent loss and complications to the plaintiff pending final arguments. 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 Judge Sr.Dn., Mehkar All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case