Parvatibai Govindrao Shingare (Mali) vs Vishwanath Shamrao Shingare (Mali) — 6/2026
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 41. Status: Notice_Unready. Next hearing: 09th June 2026.
R.C.A. - Regular Civil Appeal
CNR: MHLA010002452026
e-Filing Number
20-01-2026
Filing Number
156/2026
Filing Date
20-Jan-2026
Registration No
6/2026
Registration Date
21-Jan-2026
Court
District and Sessions Court , Latur
Judge
4-Adhoc Dist. Judge - 1 and A.s.j., Latur
Last updated 04-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Parvatibai Govindrao Shingare (Mali)
Adv. Patil Unmesh B
Respondent(s)
-
1.Vishwanath Shamrao Shingare (Mali)
-
2.Bibhishan Shamrao Shingare (Mali)
-
3.Shankar Kisan Shingare (Mali)
Case History
-
09-Jun-2026
Next hearingPending
-
06-May-2026
Notice_Unready
Adhoc Dist. Judge - 1 and A.s.j., Latur
-
22-Apr-2026
Notice_Unready
Adhoc Dist. Judge - 1 and A.s.j., Latur
-
09-Apr-2026
Notice_Unready
Adhoc Dist. Judge - 1 and A.s.j., Latur
-
02-Apr-2026
Notice_Unready
Adhoc Dist. Judge - 1 and A.s.j., Latur
-
13-Mar-2026
Notice_Unready
Adhoc Dist. Judge - 1 and A.s.j., Latur
-
04-Mar-2026
Notice_Unready
Adhoc Dist. Judge - 1 and A.s.j., Latur
-
17-Feb-2026
Notice_Unready
Adhoc Dist. Judge - 1 and A.s.j., Latur
-
14-Feb-2026
Order on ExhibitView PDF
Case Summary: R.C.A. No. 06/2026 The court rejected the appellant's request for an ex-parte temporary injunction over suit property Gat No. 37. Since the trial court had already recorded a negative finding on the appellant's ownership and the respondents dispute the property being ancestral rather than owned through compromise, the court held that the respondents must be heard before granting any injunction. Notice was issued to respondents to show cause why the temporary injunction should not be granted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
14-Feb-2026
Notice_Unready
Adhoc Dist. Judge - 1 and A.s.j., Latur
-
21-Jan-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
20-Jan-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 6/2026
Case Summary: R.C.A. No. 06/2026 The court rejected the appellant's request for an ex-parte temporary injunction over suit property Gat No. 37. Since the trial court had already recorded a negative finding on the appellant's ownership and the respondents dispute the property being ancestral rather than owned through compromise, the court held that the respondents must be heard before granting any injunction. Notice was issued to respondents to show cause why the temporary injunction should not be granted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts