Kedari Yallappa Patil vs Administrator, Grampanchayat — 3/2026

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 41 rule 1 (r). Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 22nd April 2026.

Case disposed

M.C.A. - Misc.Civil Appeal

CNR: MHKO080000732026

e-Filing Number

27-01-2026

Filing Number

50/2026

Filing Date

27-Jan-2026

Registration No

3/2026

Registration Date

27-Jan-2026

Court

Add District Court , Gadhinglaj

Judge

1-District Judge-1 Addl. Sessions Judge Gadhinglaj

Decision Date

22-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

Last updated 11-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 41 rule 1 (r)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Kedari Yallappa Patil

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Administrator, Grampanchayat

  2. 2.Village officer Grampanchayat

  3. 3.Satuppa Ramchandra Patil

  4. 4.Arjun Narayan Patel

  5. 5.Dilip Nagoji Parit

  6. 6.Ramesh Mahadev Yadav

  7. 7.Devappa Bhagoji Bokade

  8. 8.Pandurang Krishna Benake

  9. 9.Maruti Bhagoji Benake

  10. 10.Shivaji Jotiba Tupare

  11. 11.Tanaji Pandurang Gadkari

  12. 12.Subhash Punappa Patil

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 22-Apr-2026

    Copy of JudgmentView PDF

    Case Summary The District Judge dismissed the appellant's (Kedari Yallappa Patil) miscellaneous civil appeal with costs, upholding the lower court's rejection of his temporary injunction application. The court found that the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case because he did not properly describe the suit property's boundaries—his purchased plot (No. 32, measuring 2.1 guntha) did not include the open land between the plot and the Belgav-Vengurla road, which belongs to the Grampanchayat. Without proving clear title or possession to the disputed property, the court ruled that no injunction could be granted to restrain the defendants (Grampanchayat officials and other respondents) from their actions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 22-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    District Judge-1 Addl. Sessions Judge Gadhinglaj

  4. 21-Apr-2026

    Judgment

    District Judge-1 Addl. Sessions Judge Gadhinglaj

  5. 15-Apr-2026

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    District Judge-1 Addl. Sessions Judge Gadhinglaj

  6. 07-Apr-2026

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    District Judge-1 Addl. Sessions Judge Gadhinglaj

  7. 10-Mar-2026

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    District Judge-1 Addl. Sessions Judge Gadhinglaj

  8. 20-Feb-2026

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    District Judge-1 Addl. Sessions Judge Gadhinglaj

  9. 17-Feb-2026

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    District Judge-1 Addl. Sessions Judge Gadhinglaj

  10. 13-Feb-2026

    Awaiting Notice

    District Judge-1 Addl. Sessions Judge Gadhinglaj

  11. 03-Feb-2026

    Awaiting Notice

    District Judge-1 Addl. Sessions Judge Gadhinglaj

  12. 30-Jan-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  13. 27-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 3/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary The District Judge dismissed the appellant's (Kedari Yallappa Patil) miscellaneous civil appeal with costs, upholding the lower court's rejection of his temporary injunction application. The court found that the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case because he did not properly describe the suit property's boundaries—his purchased plot (No. 32, measuring 2.1 guntha) did not include the open land between the plot and the Belgav-Vengurla road, which belongs to the Grampanchayat. Without proving clear title or possession to the disputed property, the court ruled that no injunction could be granted to restrain the defendants (Grampanchayat officials and other respondents) from their actions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case