Premanand S/o Jagannath Gowardhan vs Chandrakala W/o Vishwanath Ramteke 4 Advocate - Maskare B.T. — 9/2019
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 1. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 23rd June 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHGO070002412019
Next Hearing
23rd June 2026
Filing Number
22/2019
Filing Date
05-04-2019
Registration No
9/2019
Registration Date
05-04-2019
Court
Civil Court Junior Division ,Deori
Judge
1-Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and JMFC, Deori
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Premanand S/o Jagannath Gowardhan
Adv. Ganboir P.B.
Respondent(s)
Chandrakala W/o Vishwanath Ramteke 4 Advocate - Maskare B.T.
Dhanraj Soma Tembhurne
Adv. Maskare B.T.
Keshaoram Soma Tembhurne
Adv. Maskare B.T.
Shitladevi Shriram Agrawal
Adv. Maskare B.T.
Vikash Banshilal Panpaliya
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Civil Judge Jr.Dn. and JMFC, Deori
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 23-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 11-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 11-02-2026 | Evidence |
| 20-01-2026 | Evidence |
| 03-12-2025 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Summary The temporary injunction application filed by Premanand Gowardhan against Chandrakala Ramteke regarding disputed agricultural land (Gat No. 85/2) in Gondia district has been rejected by the Civil Judge Junior Division, Deori on 14 December 2021. The court found that the applicant failed to establish a prima facie case of ownership by inheritance, as revenue records showed the non-applicant as the current owner and possessor of the property, while the applicant's supporting documents pertained to a different plot (Gat No. 85/1). Consequently, the applicant could not prove balance of convenience or irreparable loss, and each party was directed to bear their own costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The temporary injunction application filed by Premanand Gowardhan against Chandrakala Ramteke regarding disputed agricultural land (Gat No. 85/2) in Gondia district has been rejected by the Civil Judge Junior Division, Deori on 14 December 2021. The court found that the applicant failed to establish a prima facie case of ownership by inheritance, as revenue records showed the non-applicant as the current owner and possessor of the property, while the applicant's supporting documents pertained to a different plot (Gat No. 85/1). Consequently, the applicant could not prove balance of convenience or irreparable loss, and each party was directed to bear their own costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts