Savitri Madhukar Kamble vs Sakharam Madhukar Kamble Advocate - C. S. Shikhare — 47/2024
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 34,37,38,. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 08th July 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHKO110005552024
Next Hearing
08th July 2026
e-Filing Number
29-02-2024
Filing Number
85/2024
Filing Date
29-02-2024
Registration No
47/2024
Registration Date
01-03-2024
Court
Civil and Criminal Court, Peth Vadgaon
Judge
1-C.J.J.D. and J.M.F.C. Peth-Vadgaon.
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Savitri Madhukar Kamble
Adv. JADHAV DATTATRAY MARUTI
Respondent(s)
Sakharam Madhukar Kamble Advocate - C. S. Shikhare
Alka Uttam Kamble
Shashikant Hindurao Kuditrekar
Varsha Shashikant Kudutrekar
Vishal Shashikant Kuditrekar
Chiman Ananda Kamble
Usha Vasant Sadare
Avela Ashok Varane
Sunita Dinkar Kamble
Sarita Shrirang Kamble
Nivas Gulab Kamble
Rajashri Ravindra Dhobale
Asha Kamlesh Kamble
Abhijit Vishnupant Chavhan
Lakshman Atmaram Kalokhe
Arvind Baburao Kurane
Hearing History
Judge: 1-C.J.J.D. and J.M.F.C. Peth-Vadgaon.
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 23-04-2026 | Evidence | |
| 10-03-2026 | Evidence | |
| 06-01-2026 | Evidence | |
| 10-11-2025 | Evidence | |
| 06-10-2025 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Court Order Summary Case: Savitri Kamble v. Sakharam Kamble and Others | Civil Suit No. 47/2024 (Maharashtra) Outcome: The court rejected the plaintiff's application for interim injunction seeking to prevent defendant no. 6 from constructing a house on disputed agricultural land. The judge found that the properties were already partitioned in 1988 among the common ancestor's three sons, with defendant no. 6 holding a lawful share. The court ruled the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case, lacked material suppression of facts, and that the balance of convenience favored the defendant. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Order Summary Case: Savitri Kamble v. Sakharam Kamble and Others | Civil Suit No. 47/2024 (Maharashtra) Outcome: The court rejected the plaintiff's application for interim injunction seeking to prevent defendant no. 6 from constructing a house on disputed agricultural land. The judge found that the properties were already partitioned in 1988 among the common ancestor's three sons, with defendant no. 6 holding a lawful share. The court ruled the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case, lacked material suppression of facts, and that the balance of convenience favored the defendant. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts