Sou.Rohini Rangrao Khot etc.3 vs Kai.Vitthal Gopal Patil etc.8 Advocate - S. K. Mankar1. — 1600105/2016
Case under Specific Relief Act Section 34,38. Status: Hearing. Next hearing: 07th July 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHKO190004572016
Next Hearing
07th July 2026
Filing Number
1600156/2016
Filing Date
05-08-2016
Registration No
1600105/2016
Registration Date
05-08-2016
Court
Civil and Criminal Court , Radhanagari
Judge
5-Jt. CJJD and JMFC Radhanagari
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Sou.Rohini Rangrao Khot etc.3
Adv. R. D. Khade
Savitri Dinkar Magdum
Sou.Anandi Ananda Akolkar
Respondent(s)
Kai.Vitthal Gopal Patil etc.8 Advocate - S. K. Mankar1.
Santosh Vitthal Patil
Adv. S. K. Mankar1.
Smt.Vimal Vitthal Patil
Adv. S. K. Mankar1.
Yuvraj Vitthal Patil
Adv. S. K. Mankar1.
Sou.Suvarna Lahuso Bodke
Adv. S. K. Mankar1.
Sou.Vandana Dinkar Kalikate 1.
Sou.Usha Anil Patil
Adv. S. K. Mankar
Narayan Gopala Patil(Legal Heir) 2.
Bhikaji Narayan Patil
Adv. V. T. Dhanawade2.
Yashvant Narayan Patil
Adv. V. T. Dhanawade2.
Bapu Narayan Patil
Adv. V. T. Dhanawade2.
Hausabai Krushna Patil
Avubai Ganpati Magdum(Legal Heir) 3.
Pandurang Ganpati Magdum 3.
Balvant Ganpati Magdum(Legal Heir)
Hirabai Ganpati Devekar(Legal Heir) 4.
Dinkar Ganpati Devekar 4.
Mahadev Ganpati Devkar 4.
Madhukar Ganpati Devkar
Kasubai Dhondiba Patil(Legal Heir) 5.
Rajaram Dhondiba Patil 5.
Balu Dhondiba Patil 5.
Gangaram Dhondiba Patil
Manjabai Laxman Ranmale(Legal Heir) 6.
Balvant Laxman Ranmale 6.
Satappa Laxman Ranmale 6.
Anandi Laxman Savant 6.
Akkatai Vasant Shendge
Baburao Ganpati Kudle
Hearing History
Judge: 5-Jt. CJJD and JMFC Radhanagari
Hearing
Hearing
Hearing
Steps
Argument on Exh.____Unready
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 28-04-2026 | Hearing |
| 16-03-2026 | Hearing |
| 19-01-2026 | Hearing |
| 03-12-2025 | Steps |
| 28-10-2025 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: R.C.S. No. 105/2016 The court allowed the plaintiff's application to amend the plaint to include additional joint family properties (block nos. 949, 952, and 1188) as subject matter of the suit. The court found the amendments would not alter the suit's nature and would not prejudice the defendants, noting that trial had not commenced and defendants' objection regarding the plaintiff's sale of shares was a matter for trial determination. Plaintiffs must file the amended plaint by the next date; no costs awarded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: R.C.S. No. 105/2016 The court allowed the plaintiff's application to amend the plaint to include additional joint family properties (block nos. 949, 952, and 1188) as subject matter of the suit. The court found the amendments would not alter the suit's nature and would not prejudice the defendants, noting that trial had not commenced and defendants' objection regarding the plaintiff's sale of shares was a matter for trial determination. Plaintiffs must file the amended plaint by the next date; no costs awarded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts