Sarita Rukmanna Naik vs Sarita Aappa Taral Advocate - V. B. Kadukar — 67/2025

Case under Specific Relief Act Section 38. Status: Lok-Nyayalaya. Next hearing: 29th June 2026.

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHKO140002782025

Lok-Nyayalaya

Next Hearing

29th June 2026

e-Filing Number

19-04-2025

Filing Number

105/2025

Filing Date

19-04-2025

Registration No

67/2025

Registration Date

19-04-2025

Court

Civil and Criminal Court , Chandgad

Judge

6-Jt. C.J.J. D. and J.M.F.C. Chandgad

Acts & Sections

Specific Relief Act Section 38

Petitioner(s)

Sarita Rukmanna Naik

Adv. Bharati G. Kamble

Respondent(s)

Sarita Aappa Taral Advocate - V. B. Kadukar

Hearing History

Judge: 6-Jt. C.J.J. D. and J.M.F.C. Chandgad

09-05-2026

Lok-Nyayalaya

06-05-2026

Lok-Nyayalaya

16-03-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

16-01-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

27-11-2025

Argument on Exh.____Unready

Interim Orders

19-04-2025
Order on Exhibit

Case Summary: RCS 67/2025 - Sarita Rukmanna Naik v. Sarita Aappa Taral The court granted an ad interim ex-parte injunction restraining the defendant from carrying out construction on disputed property (15-foot open space adjacent to plaintiff's house) until the defendant's appearance or further court order. The plaintiff established prima facie ownership via village records and documented that illegal construction/digging was damaging her property. The court found irreparable loss would result if construction continued and that delaying the injunction would defeat its purpose. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: RCS 67/2025 - Sarita Rukmanna Naik v. Sarita Aappa Taral The court granted an ad interim ex-parte injunction restraining the defendant from carrying out construction on disputed property (15-foot open space adjacent to plaintiff's house) until the defendant's appearance or further court order. The plaintiff established prima facie ownership via village records and documented that illegal construction/digging was damaging her property. The court found irreparable loss would result if construction continued and that delaying the injunction would defeat its purpose. 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 , Chandgad All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case