Padminbai Kishanrao Suryawanshi and oths. 01 vs Hanmant Ambaji Gaikwad and oths. 06 Advocate - Mane Sunil T — 33/2016
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 1. Status: Evidence Part Heard. Next hearing: 10th June 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHLA110008802022
Next Hearing
10th June 2026
Filing Number
56/2016
Filing Date
22-01-2016
Registration No
33/2016
Registration Date
22-01-2016
Court
Civil Court Senior Division , Nilanga
Judge
2-Jt. Civil Judge Senior Division
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Padminbai Kishanrao Suryawanshi and oths. 01
Adv. Rajmalle Balaji P
Jamunabai Ambaji Gaikwad
Adv. Talikhedkar Mehgraj U
Respondent(s)
Hanmant Ambaji Gaikwad and oths. 06 Advocate - Mane Sunil T
Trivanabai Hanmant Gaikwad
Balu Hanmant Gaikwad
Manisha Balu Gaikwad
Shantabai Shesherao Rajmalle
Adv. Solanke Dattatry B
Mandabai Chandrakant Kore
Adv. Solanke Dattatry B
Narsing Baburao Zare
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Jt. Civil Judge Senior Division
Evidence Part Heard
Compliance
Compliance
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 22-04-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 06-04-2026 | Compliance |
| 13-03-2026 | Compliance |
| 25-02-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 04-02-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
Interim Orders
In Regular Civil Suit No. 33/2016 (partition and separate possession case), the court allowed the plaintiff's application to amend the plaint under CPC Order VI Rule 17. The court found the proposed amendment to be minor typographical corrections of a formal nature that would cause no substantial change to pleadings or prejudice to defendants. The plaintiff was directed to execute the amendment and supply the amended plaint copy by the next date. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
In Regular Civil Suit No. 33/2016 (partition and separate possession case), the court allowed the plaintiff's application to amend the plaint under CPC Order VI Rule 17. The court found the proposed amendment to be minor typographical corrections of a formal nature that would cause no substantial change to pleadings or prejudice to defendants. The plaintiff was directed to execute the amendment and supply the amended plaint copy by the next 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