Kavita Dilip Mathpati vs Savita Durgadas Misal Advocate - KOLHE N.G. — 48/2019

Case under Specific Relief Act Section 39. Status: Defence Evidence. Next hearing: 20th June 2026.

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHJN080003342019

Defence Evidence

Next Hearing

20th June 2026

Filing Number

115/2019

Filing Date

24-04-2019

Registration No

48/2019

Registration Date

24-04-2019

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Ghansavangi

Judge

6-Jt. CJJD and JMFC

Acts & Sections

Specific Relief Act Section 39

Petitioner(s)

Kavita Dilip Mathpati

Adv. DESHMUKH R.S.

Respondent(s)

Savita Durgadas Misal Advocate - KOLHE N.G.

Hearing History

Judge: 6-Jt. CJJD and JMFC

16-04-2026

Defence Evidence

16-03-2026

Defence Evidence

16-02-2026

Evidence

12-01-2026

Evidence

29-11-2025

Evidence

Interim Orders

30-08-2022
Order on Exhibit

Case Summary: 48/2019 Petitioner: Kavita Dilip Mathpati Respondent: Savita Durgadas Misal Advocate - KOLHE N.G. Order Date: 30 August 2022 Outcome: The petition was dismissed. The petitioner's appeal seeking recovery of 26 acres of encroached land from Ghat No. 389 was rejected. The court found no grounds to interfere with the existing land records (7/12 extract and Fard No. 4563) which showed the petitioner's spouse's name on 0.44 acres, and dismissed the case under Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Rule 17. The petitioner was directed to bear her own costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 48/2019 Petitioner: Kavita Dilip Mathpati Respondent: Savita Durgadas Misal Advocate - KOLHE N.G. Order Date: 30 August 2022 Outcome: The petition was dismissed. The petitioner's appeal seeking recovery of 26 acres of encroached land from Ghat No. 389 was rejected. The court found no grounds to interfere with the existing land records (7/12 extract and Fard No. 4563) which showed the petitioner's spouse's name on 0.44 acres, and dismissed the case under Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Rule 17. The petitioner was directed to bear her own costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Civil Court Junior Division , Ghansavangi All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case