Appaso Dattatray Khot vs Ananda Vithoba Yangare Advocate - Raghunath. B. Patil — 43/2026
Case under Specific Relief Act Section 38,. Status: Issues. Next hearing: 01st July 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHKO110004372026
Next Hearing
01st July 2026
e-Filing Number
13-02-2026
Filing Number
58/2026
Filing Date
16-02-2026
Registration No
43/2026
Registration Date
16-02-2026
Court
Civil and Criminal Court, Peth Vadgaon
Judge
3-Joint C.J.J.D. and J.M.F.C. Peth-Vadgaon.
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Appaso Dattatray Khot
Adv. I. K. Shinde
Vishal Bapuso Khot
Adv. I. K. Shinde
Ananda Balkrushna Ganbavale
Adv. I. K. Shinde
Respondent(s)
Ananda Vithoba Yangare Advocate - Raghunath. B. Patil
Siddhappa Vithoba yangare
Kiran Shivaji Khot
Hearing History
Judge: 3-Joint C.J.J.D. and J.M.F.C. Peth-Vadgaon.
Issues
Issues
Issues
Order on Exh
Order on Exh
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 08-05-2026 | Issues | |
| 15-04-2026 | Issues | |
| 18-03-2026 | Issues | |
| 17-03-2026 | Order on Exh | |
| 10-03-2026 | Order on Exh |
Interim Orders
Court Order Summary Case: Civil Appeal No. 43/2026 (Peth-Vadgaon Civil Court) Outcome: The petition was granted. The court ordered that immediate possession of 12 guntha (units of land measurement) be granted to the petitioner (plaintiffs) against the respondents, pending final judgment in the case. The court found that the petitioners had a stronger claim to the disputed agricultural land based on evidence of settlement possession and survey records, and that granting the interim relief would not cause irreparable harm to the respondents who had clear legal remedies available. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Order Summary Case: Civil Appeal No. 43/2026 (Peth-Vadgaon Civil Court) Outcome: The petition was granted. The court ordered that immediate possession of 12 guntha (units of land measurement) be granted to the petitioner (plaintiffs) against the respondents, pending final judgment in the case. The court found that the petitioners had a stronger claim to the disputed agricultural land based on evidence of settlement possession and survey records, and that granting the interim relief would not cause irreparable harm to the respondents who had clear legal remedies available. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts