Kailas Harakchand Soni vs Gopal Harakchand Saini — 104/2025

Case under Specific Relief Act Section 34. Status: Awaiting Summons. Next hearing: 01st August 2026.

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHJN090008742025

Awaiting Summons

Next Hearing

01st August 2026

e-Filing Number

20-09-2025

Filing Number

203/2025

Filing Date

26-09-2025

Registration No

104/2025

Registration Date

26-09-2025

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Badnapur

Judge

5-Civil Judge J.D. and J.M.F.C.Badnapur

Acts & Sections

Specific Relief Act Section 34

Petitioner(s)

Kailas Harakchand Soni

Adv. MAGRE SHAM JAIWANTRAO

Badriprasad Harakchand Soni

Adv. MAGRE SHAM JAIWANTRAO

Respondent(s)

Gopal Harakchand Saini

Ganesh Rohidas Jadhav

Hearing History

Judge: 5-Civil Judge J.D. and J.M.F.C.Badnapur

08-05-2026

Awaiting Summons

06-04-2026

Awaiting Summons

16-03-2026

Awaiting Summons

23-02-2026

Awaiting Summons

18-02-2026

Awaiting Summons

Interim Orders

16-03-2026
Order on Exhibit

Case Summary - 104/2025 (Kailas v. Gopal) The petitioners sought to amend the suit to include Ganesh Rohidas Jadhav as the second respondent and to ratify sale deed no. 439/2026, as the respondent had sold the property during the litigation's pendency. The court issued notice to respondents, but it was not served/returned. The petitioners' application for amendment was allowed. The court held that granting the amendment was necessary since the case is still in the primary stage and evidence has not yet commenced. Order: Petition allowed. Petitioners permitted to file necessary amendments and sale deed ratification on court record within stipulated time. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary - 104/2025 (Kailas v. Gopal) The petitioners sought to amend the suit to include Ganesh Rohidas Jadhav as the second respondent and to ratify sale deed no. 439/2026, as the respondent had sold the property during the litigation's pendency. The court issued notice to respondents, but it was not served/returned. The petitioners' application for amendment was allowed. The court held that granting the amendment was necessary since the case is still in the primary stage and evidence has not yet commenced. Order: Petition allowed. Petitioners permitted to file necessary amendments and sale deed ratification on court record within stipulated time. 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 , Badnapur All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case