Sushant Dattatray Dabade vs Chief Officer, Vadgaon Municipal Council Vadgaon Advocate - D. P. Patil — 58/2026

Case under Specific Relief Act Section 34,38. Status: Issues. Next hearing: 04th July 2026.

Issues Next hearing 04-Jul-2026 this date has passed

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHKO110006092026

e-Filing Number

07-03-2026

Filing Number

79/2026

Filing Date

07-Mar-2026

Registration No

58/2026

Registration Date

09-Mar-2026

Court

Civil and Criminal Court, Peth Vadgaon

Judge

1-Joint C.J.J.D. and J.M.F.C. Peth-Vadgaon.

Last updated 14-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Specific Relief Act Section 34,38

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Sushant Dattatray Dabade

    Adv. Moh. I. A. Shaikh

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Chief Officer, Vadgaon Municipal Council Vadgaon Advocate - D. P. Patil

  2. 2.Vadgaon Nagar Parishad

Case History

  1. 04-Jul-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 08-May-2026

    Order on T.I.View PDF

    Case Summary: Case 58/2026 Petitioner: Sushant Dattatray Dabade Respondents: Chief Officer, Vadgaon Municipal Council; Vadgaon Nagar Parishad Outcome: The petition was allowed with costs. The court granted relief to the petitioner, finding that the respondent municipal authority lacked proper legal justification to forcibly seize the property (a shop space, Gala No. 162) that the petitioner was lawfully operating as a food/meat business on lease. The court rejected the respondent's objections regarding unauthorized structures and permit violations, noting that proper procedures were not followed before attempting dispossession. The court directed that the petitioner's peaceful possession of the property be protected from unlawful interference by the municipal authority. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 08-May-2026

    Issues

    C.J.J.D. and J.M.F.C. Peth-Vadgaon.

  4. 07-May-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  5. 07-May-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  6. 07-May-2026

    Order on Exh

    C.J.J.D. and J.M.F.C. Peth-Vadgaon.

  7. 29-Apr-2026

    Order on Exh

    C.J.J.D. and J.M.F.C. Peth-Vadgaon.

  8. 27-Apr-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  9. 27-Apr-2026

    Order on Exhibit

  10. 27-Apr-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  11. 27-Apr-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  12. 27-Apr-2026

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    C.J.J.D. and J.M.F.C. Peth-Vadgaon.

  13. 24-Apr-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  14. 24-Apr-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  15. 24-Apr-2026

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    C.J.J.D. and J.M.F.C. Peth-Vadgaon.

  16. 04-Apr-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  17. 04-Apr-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  18. 04-Apr-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  19. 04-Apr-2026

    Filing of Say on Exh___Unready

    C.J.J.D. and J.M.F.C. Peth-Vadgaon.

  20. 24-Mar-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  21. 24-Mar-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  22. 24-Mar-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  23. 24-Mar-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  24. 24-Mar-2026

    Filing of Say on Exh___Unready

    C.J.J.D. and J.M.F.C. Peth-Vadgaon.

  25. 16-Mar-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  26. 16-Mar-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  27. 16-Mar-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  28. 16-Mar-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  29. 16-Mar-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  30. 16-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  31. 07-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 58/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Case 58/2026 Petitioner: Sushant Dattatray Dabade Respondents: Chief Officer, Vadgaon Municipal Council; Vadgaon Nagar Parishad Outcome: The petition was allowed with costs. The court granted relief to the petitioner, finding that the respondent municipal authority lacked proper legal justification to forcibly seize the property (a shop space, Gala No. 162) that the petitioner was lawfully operating as a food/meat business on lease. The court rejected the respondent's objections regarding unauthorized structures and permit violations, noting that proper procedures were not followed before attempting dispossession. The court directed that the petitioner's peaceful possession of the property be protected from unlawful interference by the municipal authority. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case