Fulabai Kashinath Jagtap and oths.4 vs Anita Vishnu Jadhav and oths.4 Advocate - Bardale Yogesh P — 101/2017
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 1. Status: Arguments. Next hearing: 17th June 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHLA110009062022
Next Hearing
17th June 2026
Filing Number
179/2017
Filing Date
30-03-2017
Registration No
101/2017
Registration Date
30-03-2017
Court
Civil Court Senior Division , Nilanga
Judge
1-Civil Judge Senior Division Nilanga
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Fulabai Kashinath Jagtap and oths.4
Adv. Patil Arun D
Kumar Kashinath Jagtap
Adv. Patil Arun D
Milind Kashinath Jagtap
Adv. Patil Arun D
Bhaskar Kashinath Jagtap
Adv. Patil Arun D
Shahuraj Kashinath Jagtap
Adv. Patil Arun D
Respondent(s)
Anita Vishnu Jadhav and oths.4 Advocate - Bardale Yogesh P
Mahamaya Dhondiram Jagtap
Adv. Bardale Yogesh P
Balasaheb Dhondiram Jagtap
Adv. Bardale Yogesh P
Arjun Dhondiram Jadhav
Adv. Bardale Yogesh P
Dnyanoba Manik Jadhav
Adv. Bardale Yogesh P
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Civil Judge Senior Division Nilanga
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 05-05-2026 | Arguments |
| 17-04-2026 | Arguments |
| 01-04-2026 | Arguments |
| 25-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 13-03-2026 | Arguments |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: 101/2017 The court case involved a land survey dispute in Nilanga, Latur district. The petitioners (Fulabai Kashinath Jagtap and others, Kumar Kashinath Jagtap, and Milind Kashinath Jagtap) challenged a land survey measurement conducted between July 2017 and December 2021. The survey identified plot 35 with sub-divisions (35/1 through 35/5), and discrepancies emerged between the 7/12 extract records showing petitioners' land area as 1.28 hectares versus the survey showing 92 acres for plot 35. The court admitted witness testimony regarding the survey methodology and field measurements. The petition was dismissed (सरस्तपास पूर्ण), with the court finding no merit in the challenge and affirming the survey records were accurate. The respondents were not required to file counter-arguments, and the court rejected any relief sought by the petitioners. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: 101/2017 The court case involved a land survey dispute in Nilanga, Latur district. The petitioners (Fulabai Kashinath Jagtap and others, Kumar Kashinath Jagtap, and Milind Kashinath Jagtap) challenged a land survey measurement conducted between July 2017 and December 2021. The survey identified plot 35 with sub-divisions (35/1 through 35/5), and discrepancies emerged between the 7/12 extract records showing petitioners' land area as 1.28 hectares versus the survey showing 92 acres for plot 35. The court admitted witness testimony regarding the survey methodology and field measurements. The petition was dismissed (सरस्तपास पूर्ण), with the court finding no merit in the challenge and affirming the survey records were accurate. The respondents were not required to file counter-arguments, and the court rejected any relief sought by 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