Akkatai Babaso Patil vs Raghunath Rama Patade — 157/2022

Case under Specific Relief Act Section 38,. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 20th June 2026.

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHKO130013112022

Evidence

Next Hearing

20th June 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

247/2022

Filing Date

17-09-2022

Registration No

157/2022

Registration Date

01-10-2022

Court

Civil and Criminal Court , Kagal

Judge

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

Acts & Sections

Specific Relief Act Section 38,

Petitioner(s)

Akkatai Babaso Patil

Adv. A. J. Desai

Respondent(s)

Raghunath Rama Patade

Hearing History

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

20-04-2026

Evidence

10-03-2026

Evidence

02-03-2026

Evidence

13-01-2026

Evidence

19-12-2025

Evidence

Interim Orders

27-02-2024
Order on T.I.
27-02-2024
Order on T.I.

Summary: The interim application filed by the defendants under CPC Order 39, Rules 1-2 seeking to restrain the plaintiff from creating third-party interests over the suit property and directing deposit of sugarcane bills was rejected. The court found the defendants failed to establish a prima-facie case, as their pleadings were vague and ambiguous regarding which specific area and which year's sugarcane income was to be deposited, and they provided no documentary evidence showing the plaintiff was in any hurry to alienate the property. No order as to costs was passed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The interim application filed by the defendants under CPC Order 39, Rules 1-2 seeking to restrain the plaintiff from creating third-party interests over the suit property and directing deposit of sugarcane bills was rejected. The court found the defendants failed to establish a prima-facie case, as their pleadings were vague and ambiguous regarding which specific area and which year's sugarcane income was to be deposited, and they provided no documentary evidence showing the plaintiff was in any hurry to alienate the property. No order as to costs was passed. 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