Gajanan Karbhari Murkut vs Rajendra Shivaji Murkut Advocate - Nikas JG — 82/2023
Case under Specific Relief Act Section 36. Status: Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready. Next hearing: 20th June 2026.
R.C.S. - Reg.Civil Suit
CNR: MHBU210003862023
Next Hearing
20th June 2026
e-Filing Number
22-06-2023
Filing Number
394/2023
Filing Date
26-06-2023
Registration No
82/2023
Registration Date
26-06-2023
Court
Civil Judge Sr.Dn., Mehkar
Judge
1-CIVIL JUDGE SENIOR DIVISION
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Gajanan Karbhari Murkut
Adv. Sangle NB
Respondent(s)
Rajendra Shivaji Murkut Advocate - Nikas JG
Shivaji Bhaguji Murkut
Vimal W/o Rajendra Murkut
Dttatray @ Dattu Shriram Mukut
Shivraj Dattu Murkut
Yashoda Shriram Murkut
State of Maharashtra thr. Collector, Buldana
Tahsildar, Shindkhed Raja
Hearing History
Judge: 1-CIVIL JUDGE SENIOR DIVISION
Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready
Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready
Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready
Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready
Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 05-05-2026 | Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready |
| 24-04-2026 | Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready |
| 22-04-2026 | Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready |
| 04-04-2026 | Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready |
| 25-03-2026 | Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready |
Interim Orders
Court Order Summary Petition Dismissed. The court rejected the petitioner Rajendra's application for immediate relief seeking a road across disputed agricultural land (Plot 155, Dorvi). The court found that the respondents already have an alternative north-south passage road available on the eastern side of the petitioner's property, as evidenced by inspection reports and prior proceedings. The case has been adjourned for both parties to submit further arguments within four months regarding the disputed access rights. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Order Summary Petition Dismissed. The court rejected the petitioner Rajendra's application for immediate relief seeking a road across disputed agricultural land (Plot 155, Dorvi). The court found that the respondents already have an alternative north-south passage road available on the eastern side of the petitioner's property, as evidenced by inspection reports and prior proceedings. The case has been adjourned for both parties to submit further arguments within four months regarding the disputed access rights. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts