Ratnamala Yadavrao Pagare Represented by Power of Attorney - Milind Yadavrao Pagare vs Bhimrao Kisan Pagare Advocate - HUSSAIN A.NAWAB — 9/2017
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 4. Status: Evidence Part Heard. Next hearing: 16th June 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHJN060001412017
Next Hearing
16th June 2026
Filing Number
28/2017
Filing Date
24-01-2017
Registration No
9/2017
Registration Date
24-01-2017
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Bhokardan
Judge
1-C.J.J.D. and J.M.F.C. BHOKARDAN..
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Ratnamala Yadavrao Pagare Represented by Power of Attorney - Milind Yadavrao Pagare
Adv. JADHAV D. S.
Rahul Yadavrao Pagare
Shalini Rahul Pagare
Usha Milind Pagare
Respondent(s)
Bhimrao Kisan Pagare Advocate - HUSSAIN A.NAWAB
Rajendra Kisan Pagare
Adv. HUSSAIN A.NAWAB
Gautam Ananda Pagare
Hearing History
Judge: 1-C.J.J.D. and J.M.F.C. BHOKARDAN..
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 21-04-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 07-04-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 16-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 11-02-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 21-01-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: Ratnamala Yadavrao Pagare v. Bhimrao Kisan Pagare (Civil Case 9/2017) Outcome: The suit was dismissed. The court rejected the petitioner's claims regarding land ownership disputes in Plot No. 63. The judge found that the petitioner failed to establish her contentions about land boundaries, ownership transfers, and possession. The court upheld the respondent's claims and determined that the respondent validly possesses the disputed agricultural land. The judgment was delivered on 15.12.2025. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Ratnamala Yadavrao Pagare v. Bhimrao Kisan Pagare (Civil Case 9/2017) Outcome: The suit was dismissed. The court rejected the petitioner's claims regarding land ownership disputes in Plot No. 63. The judge found that the petitioner failed to establish her contentions about land boundaries, ownership transfers, and possession. The court upheld the respondent's claims and determined that the respondent validly possesses the disputed agricultural land. The judgment was delivered on 15.12.2025. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts