Rajashri Mangesh Revade etc.01 vs Bhairu Tuka Nikam Advocate - S. S. Kestikar2. — 164/2025
Case under Specific Relief Act Section 38,34. Status: Issues. Next hearing: 24th July 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHKO130020902025
e-Filing Number
12-11-2025
Filing Number
281/2025
Filing Date
13-Nov-2025
Registration No
164/2025
Registration Date
13-Nov-2025
Court
Civil and Criminal Court , Kagal
Judge
1-C.J.J.D. And J.M.F.C.Kagal.
Last updated 15-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Rajashri Mangesh Revade etc.01
Adv. A. J. Desai
-
2.Shubham Mangesh Revade
Respondent(s)
-
1.Bhairu Tuka Nikam Advocate - S. S. Kestikar2.
-
2.Navasabai Ganpati Mulik 2.
-
3.Dilip Ganpati Mulik 2.
-
4.Namdev Ganpati Mulik
-
5.Yuvraj Mahavir Ashtekar
-
6.Sambhaji Dhondiram Borate
-
7.Tanaji Dhondiram Borate
-
8.Pandurang Chandrakant Mulik
-
9.Tanaji Shivaji Aashtekar
-
10.Suresh Navalu Hajare
-
11.Datta Shamrao Borate
-
12.Anil Dhulappa Aashtekar
-
13.Sandip Shamrao Borate
-
14.Nirmala Baliram Jadhav
-
15.Rekha Sanjay Borate
-
16.Shamrao Hari Borate
-
17.Renuka Vikas Magdum
Adv. P. B. Gurav
-
18.Ningappa Murari Kagude
-
19.Sagar Kerba Jog
-
20.Sambhaji Bhiva Jog
Case History
-
24-Jul-2026
Next hearingPending
-
11-Jun-2026
Order on T.I.View PDF
Case Summary: R.C.S. No. 164/2025 Outcome: Temporary injunction granted in favor of the plaintiffs. The court found that the plaintiffs established a prima facie case with a balance of convenience in their favor. Defendant No. 2 is restrained from interfering with the plaintiffs' possession of the disputed agricultural property (0.91 acres in Gat No. 1129, Vhannur village, Kolhapur district) or ousting them until final disposal of the suit. The court ruled that since the property constitutes an undivided share in ancestral joint family property without formal partition by metes and bounds, the sale deed executed by Defendant No. 1 (a co-heir) to Defendant No. 2 cannot transfer valid possession without court-ordered partition, following the Supreme Court precedent in *Ramdas v. Sitabai*. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
11-Jun-2026
Issues
C.J.J.D. And J.M.F.C.Kagal.
-
08-Jun-2026
Citation
C.J.J.D. And J.M.F.C.Kagal.
-
08-May-2026
Citation
C.J.J.D. And J.M.F.C.Kagal.
-
04-May-2026
Citation
C.J.J.D. And J.M.F.C.Kagal.
-
10-Apr-2026
Citation
C.J.J.D. And J.M.F.C.Kagal.
-
16-Mar-2026
Filing of Say on Exh___Unready
C.J.J.D. And J.M.F.C.Kagal.
-
25-Feb-2026
Filing of Say on Exh___Unready
C.J.J.D. And J.M.F.C.Kagal.
-
16-Feb-2026
Filing of Say on Exh___Unready
C.J.J.D. And J.M.F.C.Kagal.
-
28-Jan-2026
Documents
C.J.J.D. And J.M.F.C.Kagal.
-
12-Jan-2026
Citation
C.J.J.D. And J.M.F.C.Kagal.
-
08-Jan-2026
Argument on Exh.____Unready
C.J.J.D. And J.M.F.C.Kagal.
-
30-Dec-2025
Notice_Unready
C.J.J.D. And J.M.F.C.Kagal.
-
23-Dec-2025
Notice_Unready
C.J.J.D. And J.M.F.C.Kagal.
-
18-Dec-2025
Order on ExhibitView PDF
-
18-Dec-2025
Order on ExhibitView PDF
-
18-Dec-2025
Order on ExhibitView PDF
-
18-Dec-2025
Order on ExhibitView PDF
-
18-Dec-2025
Order on ExhibitView PDF
-
18-Dec-2025
Order on ExhibitView PDF
-
18-Dec-2025
Order on ExhibitView PDF
-
18-Dec-2025
Order on ExhibitView PDF
-
18-Dec-2025
Order on ExhibitView PDF
-
18-Dec-2025
Order on ExhibitView PDF
-
18-Dec-2025
Order on ExhibitView PDF
-
18-Dec-2025
Order on ExhibitView PDF
-
18-Dec-2025
Steps
C.J.J.D. And J.M.F.C.Kagal.
-
11-Dec-2025
Awaiting Summons
C.J.J.D. And J.M.F.C.Kagal.
-
06-Dec-2025
Awaiting Summons
C.J.J.D. And J.M.F.C.Kagal.
-
27-Nov-2025
Notice_Unready
C.J.J.D. And J.M.F.C.Kagal.
-
17-Nov-2025
Notice_Unready
C.J.J.D. And J.M.F.C.Kagal.
-
14-Nov-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
13-Nov-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 164/2025
Case Summary: R.C.S. No. 164/2025 Outcome: Temporary injunction granted in favor of the plaintiffs. The court found that the plaintiffs established a prima facie case with a balance of convenience in their favor. Defendant No. 2 is restrained from interfering with the plaintiffs' possession of the disputed agricultural property (0.91 acres in Gat No. 1129, Vhannur village, Kolhapur district) or ousting them until final disposal of the suit. The court ruled that since the property constitutes an undivided share in ancestral joint family property without formal partition by metes and bounds, the sale deed executed by Defendant No. 1 (a co-heir) to Defendant No. 2 cannot transfer valid possession without court-ordered partition, following the Supreme Court precedent in *Ramdas v. Sitabai*. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts