Krishnat Shamrao Khade vs Shantabai Mhadu Kambale Advocate - S. M. Savardekar — 1700206/2014
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 10,38. Status: Evidence Part Heard. Next hearing: 17th June 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHKO130008952014
Next Hearing
17th June 2026
Filing Number
1700206/2014
Filing Date
29-11-2014
Registration No
1700206/2014
Registration Date
29-11-2014
Court
Civil and Criminal Court , Kagal
Judge
1-C.J.J.D. AND J.M.F.C.Kagal.
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Krishnat Shamrao Khade
Adv. S. S. Kestikar
Rajaram Manappa Khade
Sachin Shivaji khade
Respondent(s)
Shantabai Mhadu Kambale Advocate - S. M. Savardekar
Bhikabai Satappa Kambale
Satish Shamrao Mane
Hearing History
Judge: 1-C.J.J.D. AND J.M.F.C.Kagal.
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 17-04-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 16-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 04-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 02-02-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 12-01-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: 1700206/2014 The plaintiff's application to impound an agreement to sell dated 06/03/2012 was ALLOWED. The court found the document was unregistered and insufficiently stamped (executed on Rs. 100 stamp paper). Per Section 33 of the Bombay Stamp Act, the court impounded the agreement and directed it be sent to the Stamp Collector for recovery of necessary stamp duty. The plaintiff was directed to comply within one month and provide the required certificate from the concerned office. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: 1700206/2014 The plaintiff's application to impound an agreement to sell dated 06/03/2012 was ALLOWED. The court found the document was unregistered and insufficiently stamped (executed on Rs. 100 stamp paper). Per Section 33 of the Bombay Stamp Act, the court impounded the agreement and directed it be sent to the Stamp Collector for recovery of necessary stamp duty. The plaintiff was directed to comply within one month and provide the required certificate from the concerned office. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts