Rihana @ Halima W/o Ramjan Sayyad vs Ramjan S/o Rashidsab Sayyad Advocate - Hulle Sanjay S — 658/2023

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 7. Status: Evidence Part Heard. Next hearing: 18th June 2026.

Evidence Part Heard Next hearing 18-Jun-2026

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHLA090018942023

Filing Number

1016/2023

Filing Date

26-Apr-2023

Registration No

658/2023

Registration Date

26-Apr-2023

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Udgir

Judge

1-1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

Last updated 03-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 7

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Rihana @ Halima W/o Ramjan Sayyad

    Adv. Shaikh Habib R

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Ramjan S/o Rashidsab Sayyad Advocate - Hulle Sanjay S

Case History

  1. 18-Jun-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 28-Apr-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  3. 08-Apr-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  4. 13-Mar-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  5. 12-Feb-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  6. 30-Jan-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  7. 10-Jan-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  8. 03-Jan-2026

    Evidence Part Heard

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  9. 25-Nov-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  10. 11-Nov-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  11. 30-Oct-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  12. 04-Oct-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  13. 16-Sep-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  14. 25-Aug-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  15. 22-Jul-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  16. 12-Jun-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  17. 03-Apr-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  18. 07-Feb-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  19. 21-Jan-2025

    Evidence Part Heard

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  20. 16-Dec-2024

    Evidence Part Heard

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  21. 05-Nov-2024

    Evidence Part Heard

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  22. 21-Sep-2024

    Evidence Part Heard

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  23. 14-Aug-2024

    Dismissal Order

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  24. 23-Jul-2024

    Hearing Without W.S.

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  25. 25-Jun-2024

    Hearing Without W.S.

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  26. 23-Apr-2024

    Hearing Without W.S.

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  27. 20-Mar-2024

    Hearing Without W.S.

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  28. 07-Feb-2024

    Hearing Without W.S.

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  29. 17-Jan-2024

    Hearing Without W.S.

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  30. 21-Dec-2023

    Hearing Without W.S.

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  31. 07-Dec-2023

    Order on T.I.View PDF

    Case Summary: 658/2023 Case: Rihana @ Halima v. Ramjan S/o Rashidsab Sayyad Court: Civil Court, Udgir (Maharashtra) Date: 07/12/2023 Outcome: Petition DISMISSED Key Facts: Petitioner sought an interim injunction to prevent respondent (her estranged husband) from selling agricultural land (Survey No. 140, measuring 1 hectare 72 acres). Petitioner claimed the property was gifted to her orally in 2017 by respondent in the presence of witnesses, and she has been in possession since then. Court's Finding: The court found that petitioner failed to establish prima facie case. While respondent's name appeared on government records, petitioner produced no documentary evidence supporting her alleged oral gift or current possession. The court held petitioner had not proven irreparable harm would result from denial of interim relief. Order: The petition for interim injunction under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2, CPC was dismissed due to lack of prima facie case and failure to establish balance of convenience in petitioner's favor. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  32. 07-Dec-2023

    Hearing Without W.S.

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  33. 22-Nov-2023

    Hearing Without W.S.

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  34. 02-Nov-2023

    Hearing Without W.S.

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  35. 16-Oct-2023

    Hearing Without W.S.

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  36. 30-Aug-2023

    W.S. and Say

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  37. 28-Jul-2023

    W.S. and Say

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  38. 26-Jun-2023

    Ex-Parte Order

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  39. 04-May-2023

    Appearance

    1st Jt. Civil JudgeJ.D. J.M.F.C. Udgir

  40. 27-Apr-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  41. 26-Apr-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. 658/2023

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 658/2023 Case: Rihana @ Halima v. Ramjan S/o Rashidsab Sayyad Court: Civil Court, Udgir (Maharashtra) Date: 07/12/2023 Outcome: Petition DISMISSED Key Facts: Petitioner sought an interim injunction to prevent respondent (her estranged husband) from selling agricultural land (Survey No. 140, measuring 1 hectare 72 acres). Petitioner claimed the property was gifted to her orally in 2017 by respondent in the presence of witnesses, and she has been in possession since then. Court's Finding: The court found that petitioner failed to establish prima facie case. While respondent's name appeared on government records, petitioner produced no documentary evidence supporting her alleged oral gift or current possession. The court held petitioner had not proven irreparable harm would result from denial of interim relief. Order: The petition for interim injunction under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2, CPC was dismissed due to lack of prima facie case and failure to establish balance of convenience in petitioner's favor. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case