Sadashiv Chanbasappa Swami vs Shripati Tukaram Torase — 103/2023

Case under Specific Relief (Amendment) Act Section 37. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 10th July 2026.

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHKO130006862023

Evidence

Next Hearing

10th July 2026

e-Filing Number

14-06-2023

Filing Number

187/2023

Filing Date

14-06-2023

Registration No

103/2023

Registration Date

16-06-2023

Court

Civil and Criminal Court , Kagal

Judge

10-Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C.Kagal.-2

Acts & Sections

Specific Relief (Amendment) Act Section 37

Petitioner(s)

Sadashiv Chanbasappa Swami

Adv. S S Kestikar

Respondent(s)

Shripati Tukaram Torase

Sulochana Shripati Torase

Arvind Shripati Torase

Apurva Arvind Torase

Hearing History

Judge: 10-Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C.Kagal.-2

04-05-2026

Evidence

16-03-2026

Evidence

19-01-2026

Evidence

26-11-2025

Evidence

08-10-2025

Evidence

Interim Orders

31-07-2023
Order on T.I.

Case Summary: RCS 103/2023 Outcome: Temporary injunction application ALLOWED. The court granted the plaintiff's request for temporary restraint against the defendants, restricting them from obstructing the plaintiff's peaceful possession of the suit property and from interfering with the completion of roof repairs to his old house until final disposal of the suit. The court found the plaintiff established a prima facie case, balance of convenience favored the plaintiff, and irreparable loss would result without the injunction, particularly given ongoing monsoon season damage risk to the unroofed house. No costs awarded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: RCS 103/2023 Outcome: Temporary injunction application ALLOWED. The court granted the plaintiff's request for temporary restraint against the defendants, restricting them from obstructing the plaintiff's peaceful possession of the suit property and from interfering with the completion of roof repairs to his old house until final disposal of the suit. The court found the plaintiff established a prima facie case, balance of convenience favored the plaintiff, and irreparable loss would result without the injunction, particularly given ongoing monsoon season damage risk to the unroofed house. No costs awarded. 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

Civil and Criminal Court , Kagal All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case