Dipak Parasharam Patil vs Mahesh Parasharam Patil etc.1 Advocate - O. S. Diwan — 168/2022
Case under Specific Relief Act Section 37. Status: Hearing. Next hearing: 13th July 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHKO130014192022
Next Hearing
13th July 2026
Filing Number
277/2022
Filing Date
31-10-2022
Registration No
168/2022
Registration Date
04-11-2022
Court
Civil and Criminal Court , Kagal
Judge
1-C.J.J.D. AND J.M.F.C.Kagal.
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Dipak Parasharam Patil
Adv. S. S. Kestikar
Respondent(s)
Mahesh Parasharam Patil etc.1 Advocate - O. S. Diwan
Rajaram Parasharam Patil
Hearing History
Judge: 1-C.J.J.D. AND J.M.F.C.Kagal.
Hearing
Hearing
Hearing
Hearing
Hearing
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 04-05-2026 | Hearing |
| 16-03-2026 | Hearing |
| 29-01-2026 | Hearing |
| 27-11-2025 | Hearing |
| 08-10-2025 | Hearing |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: R.C.S.No. 168/2022 Order Date: March 4, 2024 Outcome: The court partly allowed the plaintiff Dipak Patil's interim application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC. Defendants are temporarily restrained from ousting the plaintiff from agricultural properties (Gat Nos. 1126, 1140, 844, 519, and 478) and village property no. 681/1 until suit disposal. However, the request for restraint regarding entire Gat No. 232 and village property no. 681/2 was rejected. The court found a partial prima facie case of joint possession and irreparable loss to the plaintiff, distinguishing between properties while noting the defendants' reliance on a Will regarding Gat No. 232 precluded full relief. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: R.C.S.No. 168/2022 Order Date: March 4, 2024 Outcome: The court partly allowed the plaintiff Dipak Patil's interim application under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 CPC. Defendants are temporarily restrained from ousting the plaintiff from agricultural properties (Gat Nos. 1126, 1140, 844, 519, and 478) and village property no. 681/1 until suit disposal. However, the request for restraint regarding entire Gat No. 232 and village property no. 681/2 was rejected. The court found a partial prima facie case of joint possession and irreparable loss to the plaintiff, distinguishing between properties while noting the defendants' reliance on a Will regarding Gat No. 232 precluded full relief. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts