BALASAHEB S O MANOHAR SHINDE vs RASHIKA W O MANOHAR SHINDE Advocate - karande Shankar M. — 11/2026
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section SECTION8RULE1AND2. Disposed: Uncontested--LOKADALAT on 14th March 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHLA150000292026
e-Filing Number
05-01-2026
Filing Number
20/2026
Filing Date
07-Jan-2026
Registration No
11/2026
Registration Date
07-Jan-2026
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Chakur
Judge
1-Civil Judge J.D. and J.M.F.C. Chakur
Decision Date
14-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--LOKADALAT
Last updated 04-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.BALASAHEB S O MANOHAR SHINDE
Adv. Shivpurkar Suhash D
Respondent(s)
-
1.RASHIKA W O MANOHAR SHINDE Advocate - karande Shankar M.
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
14-Mar-2026
Order on ExhibitView PDF
Case Summary: Balasaheb S/O Manohar Shinde v. Rashika W/O Manohar Shinde (Case 11/2026) The court dismissed the petitioner's petition challenging the respondent's ownership claim over disputed agricultural land. The court found that the respondent had established valid ownership through proper documentation and legal proceedings, while the petitioner failed to produce credible evidence supporting his claim to the land in question. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
14-Mar-2026
Disposed
Civil Judge J.D. and J.M.F.C. Chakur
-
13-Mar-2026
Lok-Nyayalaya
Civil Judge J.D. and J.M.F.C. Chakur
-
07-Mar-2026
Filing of Vakilpatra
Civil Judge J.D. and J.M.F.C. Chakur
-
18-Feb-2026
Awaiting Summons
Civil Judge J.D. and J.M.F.C. Chakur
-
12-Feb-2026
Amended Plaint
Civil Judge J.D. and J.M.F.C. Chakur
-
23-Jan-2026
Written Statement
Civil Judge J.D. and J.M.F.C. Chakur
-
07-Jan-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
07-Jan-2026
Case filed
Registration No. 11/2026
Case Summary: Balasaheb S/O Manohar Shinde v. Rashika W/O Manohar Shinde (Case 11/2026) The court dismissed the petitioner's petition challenging the respondent's ownership claim over disputed agricultural land. The court found that the respondent had established valid ownership through proper documentation and legal proceedings, while the petitioner failed to produce credible evidence supporting his claim to the land in question. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts