Khanderao Tulshram Thakare vs Sukdeogir Damugir Gosavi etc-3 Advocate - Rupchandani M. B. — 1500098/2012
Status: Steps. Next hearing: 14th May 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHDH040003312012
Next Hearing
14th May 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
1500098/2012
Filing Date
08-10-2012
Registration No
1500098/2012
Registration Date
08-10-2012
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Dondaicha
Judge
3-Joint Civil Judge J.D. and J.M.F.C., Dondaicha
Petitioner(s)
Khanderao Tulshram Thakare
Adv. Ayachit Nitinkumar P.
Respondent(s)
Sukdeogir Damugir Gosavi etc-3 Advocate - Rupchandani M. B.
Smt.Sarswatibai Sukadevgir Goswami
Adv. Jamadar B. B.
Kishor Sukadevgir Gosami
Adv. Jamdar
Hearing History
Judge: 3-Joint Civil Judge J.D. and J.M.F.C., Dondaicha
Steps
Steps
Steps
Steps
Steps
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 10-04-2026 | Steps | |
| 09-03-2026 | Steps | |
| 26-02-2026 | Steps | |
| 23-02-2026 | Steps | |
| 29-01-2026 | Steps |
Interim Orders
Summary: The Civil Judge rejected the defendants' application to amend their written statement in a specific performance suit regarding a 2010 property transaction. The court found that the proposed amendments were not necessary to resolve the core dispute and that the defendants failed to provide satisfactory reasons for the seven-year delay in filing the amendment application after the written statement was filed in January 2013. Since the trial had already commenced with the plaintiff's evidence recorded, allowing the amendments would prejudice the plaintiff and unnecessarily prolong the already pending suit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The Civil Judge rejected the defendants' application to amend their written statement in a specific performance suit regarding a 2010 property transaction. The court found that the proposed amendments were not necessary to resolve the core dispute and that the defendants failed to provide satisfactory reasons for the seven-year delay in filing the amendment application after the written statement was filed in January 2013. Since the trial had already commenced with the plaintiff's evidence recorded, allowing the amendments would prejudice the plaintiff and unnecessarily prolong the already pending suit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts