Dhananjay Janardhan Bore vs Vijay Bhimrao Awhale Advocate - Bajad P.V — 175/2025

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section Order39Rule1and2. Status: Argument on Exh.____Unready. Next hearing: 12th June 2026.

R.C.S. - Reg.Civil Suit

CNR: MHBU210005732025

Argument on Exh.____Unready

Next Hearing

12th June 2026

e-Filing Number

05-08-2025

Filing Number

620/2025

Filing Date

08-08-2025

Registration No

175/2025

Registration Date

08-08-2025

Court

Civil Judge Sr.Dn., Mehkar

Judge

1-CIVIL JUDGE SENIOR DIVISION

Acts & Sections

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Section Order39Rule1and2

Petitioner(s)

Dhananjay Janardhan Bore

Respondent(s)

Vijay Bhimrao Awhale Advocate - Bajad P.V

State of Maharashtra Through Sub Divisional Officer Mehkar

State of Maharashtra Through Collector Buldhana

Hearing History

Judge: 1-CIVIL JUDGE SENIOR DIVISION

21-04-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

08-04-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

23-03-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

13-03-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

11-03-2026

Order on Exh

Interim Orders

21-04-2026
Order on T.I.

SUMMARY The temporary injunction application is partly allowed. The court restrained Defendant No.2 (SDO Mehkar) from creating any obstruction to the plaintiff's peaceful possession of the suit property until the final decision of the case. The court found the plaintiff has a prima-facie case as the registered property owner with lawful possession, and that the balance of convenience and risk of irreparable loss favor protecting his possession against the improperly initiated review proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

SUMMARY The temporary injunction application is partly allowed. The court restrained Defendant No.2 (SDO Mehkar) from creating any obstruction to the plaintiff's peaceful possession of the suit property until the final decision of the case. The court found the plaintiff has a prima-facie case as the registered property owner with lawful possession, and that the balance of convenience and risk of irreparable loss favor protecting his possession against the improperly initiated review proceedings. 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