Bapu Dnyanu Bhopale vs Babu Bandu Powar — 97/2023
Case under Specific Relief (amendment) Act Section 37. Status: Issues. Next hearing: 22nd June 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHKO130006292023
Next Hearing
22nd June 2026
e-Filing Number
15-05-2023
Filing Number
176/2023
Filing Date
26-05-2023
Registration No
97/2023
Registration Date
14-06-2023
Court
Civil and Criminal Court , Kagal
Judge
10-Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C.Kagal.-2
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Bapu Dnyanu Bhopale
Adv. S. S. Kestikar
Respondent(s)
Babu Bandu Powar
Ganpati Bandu Powar
Shripati Bandu Powar
Akshay Shripati Powar
Sagar Shripati Powar
Saubai Balvant Powar
Shivaji Balvant Powar
Krushnat Balvant Powar
Shobha Dattatray Patil
Sonabai Dadu Kachare
Kamalabai Vasant Patil
Sudhatai Aananda Powar
Nayku Lakhu Bhopale
Yuvaraj Vasant Bhopale
Gopal Bandu Powar
Vishnu Vasant Bhopale
Hearing History
Judge: 10-Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C.Kagal.-2
Issues
Issues
Issues
Issues
Issues
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 08-05-2026 | Issues | |
| 29-04-2026 | Issues | |
| 10-03-2026 | Issues | |
| 09-01-2026 | Issues | |
| 25-11-2025 | Issues |
Interim Orders
Court Order Summary Case: MHKO13000629/2023 - Civil Suit regarding property possession (Scheduled Caste Act dispute over ancestral property) Order: The petition (Application No. 5) for interim injunction restraining Defendants 1-9 from selling or transferring the disputed property until the main case is decided has been DISMISSED/REJECTED. The court found that the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case, balance of convenience favored the defendants, and the plaintiff did not demonstrate irreparable harm warranting interim relief. No costs awarded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Order Summary Case: MHKO13000629/2023 - Civil Suit regarding property possession (Scheduled Caste Act dispute over ancestral property) Order: The petition (Application No. 5) for interim injunction restraining Defendants 1-9 from selling or transferring the disputed property until the main case is decided has been DISMISSED/REJECTED. The court found that the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case, balance of convenience favored the defendants, and the plaintiff did not demonstrate irreparable harm warranting interim relief. No costs awarded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts