Shri Bhairu Ganapati Patil alis Kesarkar vs Shri Sambhaji Joti Kesarkar Advocate - R. I. Palkar — 19/2024

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section order41rule1. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 23rd March 2026.

R.C.A. - Regular Civil Appeal

CNR: MHKO080003222024

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

12-04-2024

Filing Number

224/2024

Filing Date

16-04-2024

Registration No

19/2024

Registration Date

16-04-2024

Court

Add District Court , Gadhinglaj

Judge

1-District Judge-1 Addl. Sessions Judge Gadhinglaj

Decision Date

23rd March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section order41rule1

Petitioner(s)

Shri Bhairu Ganapati Patil alis Kesarkar

Adv. S. N. Fagare

Shri Suryakant Ganpati Patil alis Kesarkar

Adv. S.N. Fagare

Respondent(s)

Shri Sambhaji Joti Kesarkar Advocate - R. I. Palkar

Smt Rangubai Joti Kesarkar

Suryakant Ganapati Patil Alis Kesarakr

Hearing History

Judge: 1-District Judge-1 Addl. Sessions Judge Gadhinglaj

23-03-2026

Disposed

17-03-2026

Judgment

16-03-2026

Judgment

13-03-2026

Judgment

27-02-2026

Judgment

Final Orders / Judgements

23-03-2026
Copy of Judgment

Case Summary: Reg. Civil Appeal No. 19/2024 Court Decision: The District Judge dismissed the appellants' appeal and upheld the lower court's dismissal of their suit. The court found the suit barred by res judicata, as the same land dispute between the same parties had been finally decided in previous litigation (R.C.A. No. 22/1998 and High Court Second Appeal No. 263/2002). The appellants failed to prove title or illegal dispossession; revenue records and prior court orders confirmed the respondents' lawful possession of their half-share of the agricultural land (Gat No. 242). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Reg. Civil Appeal No. 19/2024 Court Decision: The District Judge dismissed the appellants' appeal and upheld the lower court's dismissal of their suit. The court found the suit barred by res judicata, as the same land dispute between the same parties had been finally decided in previous litigation (R.C.A. No. 22/1998 and High Court Second Appeal No. 263/2002). The appellants failed to prove title or illegal dispossession; revenue records and prior court orders confirmed the respondents' lawful possession of their half-share of the agricultural land (Gat No. 242). 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

Add District Court , Gadhinglaj All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case