Ramesh Anantbuwa Dhole vs Chandabai Dilipkumar Tated — 20/2019
Case under Specific Relief Act Section 22. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 22nd June 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHJN080002142019
Next Hearing
22nd June 2026
Filing Number
83/2019
Filing Date
26-02-2019
Registration No
20/2019
Registration Date
26-02-2019
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Ghansavangi
Judge
6-Jt. CJJD and JMFC
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Ramesh Anantbuwa Dhole
Adv. KULKARNI K R
Respondent(s)
Chandabai Dilipkumar Tated
Priyanka Dilipkumar Tated
Manishabai Mahavir Tated
Maya Nilchand Tated
Kanchan Rangnath Deshpande
Bhagubai Umaji Gadhve
Baban Narayan Awghade
Draupadibai Rangnath Gadhve
Hearing History
Judge: 6-Jt. CJJD and JMFC
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 27-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 16-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 03-02-2026 | Evidence |
| 18-12-2025 | Evidence |
| 30-09-2025 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: Ramesh Anantbuwa Dhole v. Chandabai Dilipkumar Tated & Others (2019/20) Outcome: The petition for temporary injunction (interim relief) was allowed. The court ordered that the respondents are restrained from transferring, selling, or otherwise disposing of the disputed agricultural property until the final resolution of the case; each party shall bear their own costs. Key Issue: Petitioner claimed ownership rights over agricultural land (3.85 hectares) registered under deity trust (Devsthan), arguing the respondents obtained fraudulent documents and were attempting to illegally sell the property. Respondents contended they were legitimate purchasers with valid title dating back to 1979. The court found the petitioner had established sufficient prima facie case for granting temporary protection against dispossession. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Ramesh Anantbuwa Dhole v. Chandabai Dilipkumar Tated & Others (2019/20) Outcome: The petition for temporary injunction (interim relief) was allowed. The court ordered that the respondents are restrained from transferring, selling, or otherwise disposing of the disputed agricultural property until the final resolution of the case; each party shall bear their own costs. Key Issue: Petitioner claimed ownership rights over agricultural land (3.85 hectares) registered under deity trust (Devsthan), arguing the respondents obtained fraudulent documents and were attempting to illegally sell the property. Respondents contended they were legitimate purchasers with valid title dating back to 1979. The court found the petitioner had established sufficient prima facie case for granting temporary protection against dispossession. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts