Rohitkumar And Company Prop Jagdishpraksh Jugalkishor Karva HUF vs Naval Wiving Works Prop Navalkishor Ramratan Khatod Advocate - S. Y. Mane — 10/2026
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section O 37 R 4. Status: Reply/Say. Next hearing: 08th June 2026.
Civil M.A. - Civil Misc. Application
CNR: MHKO050003342026
e-Filing Number
22-01-2026
Filing Number
83/2026
Filing Date
22-Jan-2026
Registration No
10/2026
Registration Date
22-Jan-2026
Court
Civil Court Senior Division , Ichalkaranji
Judge
7-4th Jt. Civil Judge Jr.Dn. Ichalkaranji
Last updated 11-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Rohitkumar And Company Prop Jagdishpraksh Jugalkishor Karva HUF
Adv. AGARWAL ASHOK GHANASHYAM
Respondent(s)
-
1.Naval Wiving Works Prop Navalkishor Ramratan Khatod Advocate - S. Y. Mane
Case History
-
08-Jun-2026
Next hearingPending
-
13-Apr-2026
Reply/Say
4th Jt. Civil Judge Jr.Dn. Ichalkaranji
-
10-Mar-2026
Reply/Say
4th Jt. Civil Judge Jr.Dn. Ichalkaranji
-
24-Feb-2026
Ex-Parte Order
4th Jt. Civil Judge Jr.Dn. Ichalkaranji
-
27-Jan-2026
Order on ExhibitView PDF
-
27-Jan-2026
Order on ExhibitView PDF
Court Order Summary The stay petition was granted. The Civil Court (Senior Division, Ichalkaranji) suspended the execution of the ex-parte decree and order dated 14/07/2025 passed in Summary Civil Case No. 16/2024 pending the final disposal of the main application. The petitioner (Rohitkumar & Company) argued that proper summons were never served and sought relief on grounds of natural justice and procedural defects in the original summary suit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
27-Jan-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
22-Jan-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 10/2026
Court Order Summary The stay petition was granted. The Civil Court (Senior Division, Ichalkaranji) suspended the execution of the ex-parte decree and order dated 14/07/2025 passed in Summary Civil Case No. 16/2024 pending the final disposal of the main application. The petitioner (Rohitkumar & Company) argued that proper summons were never served and sought relief on grounds of natural justice and procedural defects in the original summary suit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts