Abdul Qadeer Abdul Shakur vs Janabai Kisanrao Mhaske Advocate - RUNWAL J. P. — 200075/2012
Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 20th March 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHJN020001512012
Filing Number
200075/2012
Filing Date
04-02-2012
Registration No
200075/2012
Registration Date
04-02-2012
Court
Civil Court Senior Division , Jalna
Judge
14-3rd Joint Civil Judge Junior Division
Decision Date
20th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED
Petitioner(s)
Abdul Qadeer Abdul Shakur
Adv. MUKIM L.P.
Respondent(s)
Janabai Kisanrao Mhaske Advocate - RUNWAL J. P.
Ramrao
Balasaheb
Babasaheb
Hearing History
Judge: 14-3rd Joint Civil Judge Junior Division
Disposed
Citation
Judgment
Judgment
Arguments
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 20-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 16-03-2026 | Citation |
| 11-03-2026 | Judgment |
| 16-02-2026 | Judgment |
| 21-01-2026 | Arguments |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: RCS 75/2012 Court Decision: The suit is dismissed with costs. Key Reasoning: The court rejected the plaintiff's claim for declaration of ownership and possession of a 7-acre agricultural property (Survey No. 176, Kumbefal, Jalna). The court found that: (1) the plaintiff failed to prove the sale deed was an absolute conveyance rather than a security document for a Rs. 45,000 loan, as the attesting witnesses' prior depositions confirmed the defendant executed it only as loan security; (2) the plaintiff did not testify personally despite being the suit-filer, rendering evidence of his power-of-attorney holder unreliable; and (3) the suit was barred by the law of limitation, res judicata doctrine, and CPC Order II Rule 2, as the plaintiff had previously filed related suits (RCS 90/2003 and RCS 442/2007) on the same property and cause of action but failed to claim declaration relief then. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Case Summary: RCS 75/2012 Court Decision: The suit is dismissed with costs. Key Reasoning: The court rejected the plaintiff's claim for declaration of ownership and possession of a 7-acre agricultural property (Survey No. 176, Kumbefal, Jalna). The court found that: (1) the plaintiff failed to prove the sale deed was an absolute conveyance rather than a security document for a Rs. 45,000 loan, as the attesting witnesses' prior depositions confirmed the defendant executed it only as loan security; (2) the plaintiff did not testify personally despite being the suit-filer, rendering evidence of his power-of-attorney holder unreliable; and (3) the suit was barred by the law of limitation, res judicata doctrine, and CPC Order II Rule 2, as the plaintiff had previously filed related suits (RCS 90/2003 and RCS 442/2007) on the same property and cause of action but failed to claim declaration relief then. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts