Riyajoddhin S/o Afajaloddhin Jahagirdar (Kazi)and other 4 vs Harnyabai W/o Dnyanoba More and other 1 Advocate - Patil Hemantkumar R — 615/2022
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 7. Status: Evidence Part Heard. Next hearing: 04th July 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHLA050005972025
Next Hearing
04th July 2026
Filing Number
369/2025
Filing Date
15-06-2022
Registration No
615/2022
Registration Date
15-06-2022
Court
Civil Court Senior Division , Ahmedpur
Judge
2-Jt. Civil Judge Senior Division Ahmedpur
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Riyajoddhin S/o Afajaloddhin Jahagirdar (Kazi)and other 4
Adv. Ghogre Dhanraj L
Liyakhatmunisa W/o Afjaloddhin Jahagirdar (kazi)
Salauddhin S/o Afajaloddhin Jahagirdar (kazi)
jakiyoddhin S/o Afjaloddhin Jahagirdar (Kazi
Samiyoddhin S/o Afjaloddin Jahagirdar (Kazi)
Respondent(s)
Harnyabai W/o Dnyanoba More and other 1 Advocate - Patil Hemantkumar R
Dnyanoba S/o Sudam More
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Jt. Civil Judge Senior Division Ahmedpur
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 28-04-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 13-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 12-02-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 22-01-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 18-12-2025 | Evidence Part Heard |
Interim Orders
Case 615/2022 Summary Outcome: The petition was dismissed. The court found that the petitioners filed a frivolous suit against the respondents regarding a disputed loan transaction from 1991. The court determined through cross-examination that the petitioners could not substantiate their claims of unpaid debt or provide receipts for alleged interest payments. The deed (Sale Deed No. 2399/1991) was found to be valid and binding. The civil judge concluded that the petition was filed without legitimate cause and dismissed it with costs awarded against the petitioners. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case 615/2022 Summary Outcome: The petition was dismissed. The court found that the petitioners filed a frivolous suit against the respondents regarding a disputed loan transaction from 1991. The court determined through cross-examination that the petitioners could not substantiate their claims of unpaid debt or provide receipts for alleged interest payments. The deed (Sale Deed No. 2399/1991) was found to be valid and binding. The civil judge concluded that the petition was filed without legitimate cause and dismissed it with costs awarded against the petitioners. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts