Shri.Tatoba Damodar Adsul etc.2 vs Shri.Bhikaji Ganpati Adsul etc.3 Advocate - V. T. Dhanawade — 1600063/2017
Case under Specific Relief Act Section 34. Status: Additional Issues. Next hearing: 16th June 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHKO190002042017
Next Hearing
16th June 2026
Filing Number
1600092/2017
Filing Date
21-04-2017
Registration No
1600063/2017
Registration Date
25-04-2017
Court
Civil and Criminal Court , Radhanagari
Judge
5-Jt. CJJD and JMFC Radhanagari
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Shri.Tatoba Damodar Adsul etc.2
Adv. T. G. Halake
Shri.Dilip Damodar Adsul
Adv. T. G. Halake
Respondent(s)
Shri.Bhikaji Ganpati Adsul etc.3 Advocate - V. T. Dhanawade
Shri.Prakash Ganpati Adsul
Smt.Satabai Ganpati Adsul
Hearing History
Judge: 5-Jt. CJJD and JMFC Radhanagari
Additional Issues
Additional Issues
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 10-03-2026 | Additional Issues |
| 27-01-2026 | Additional Issues |
| 05-12-2025 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 28-10-2025 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 23-09-2025 | Evidence Part Heard |
Interim Orders
The court allowed the plaintiff's application for amendment of the plaint under CPC Order VI Rule 17, permitting correction of property boundaries from the complete CS No.559 to only the road used for ingress and egress. The amendment was granted following Supreme Court's liberal approach principles, though the court imposed costs of Rs. 500/- payable to defendants as compensation for the seven-year delay. The plaintiffs must execute the amendment by the next hearing date. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The court allowed the plaintiff's application for amendment of the plaint under CPC Order VI Rule 17, permitting correction of property boundaries from the complete CS No.559 to only the road used for ingress and egress. The amendment was granted following Supreme Court's liberal approach principles, though the court imposed costs of Rs. 500/- payable to defendants as compensation for the seven-year delay. The plaintiffs must execute the amendment by the next hearing date. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts