Prabhakar Jagannath Dhenge through Prabja Prabhakar Dhenge vs Shriram Gopalrao Nikhade Expired through Usha Shriram Nikhade Advocate - G. R. Hunge — 144/2017

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 151. Status: Arguments. Next hearing: 15th June 2026.

R.C.S. - Reg.Civil Suit

CNR: MHNG100009912017

Arguments

Next Hearing

15th June 2026

Filing Number

1489/2017

Filing Date

30-06-2011

Registration No

144/2017

Registration Date

07-07-2011

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Umrer

Judge

8-Civil Judge Senior Division, Umrer

Acts & Sections

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Section 151

Petitioner(s)

Prabhakar Jagannath Dhenge through Prabja Prabhakar Dhenge

Adv. A. B. Pongde

Nilesh s/o Prabhakar Dhenge

Shaisesh s/o Prabhakar Dhenge

Mahesh s/o Prabhakar Dhenge

Namrata d/o. Swapnil Palandurkar

Respondent(s)

Shriram Gopalrao Nikhade Expired through Usha Shriram Nikhade Advocate - G. R. Hunge

Vilas Gopalrao Nikhade

Adv. G. R. Hunge

State of Maharashtra, Mumbai Through Collector, Nagpur

Adv. P. R. Bhure

Deputy Director Of Land Records, Nagpur

Adv. P. R. Bhure

Ashish Shriram Nikhade

Rashi Shriram Nikhade

Hearing History

Judge: 8-Civil Judge Senior Division, Umrer

02-05-2026

Arguments

07-04-2026

Arguments

10-03-2026

Arguments

20-01-2026

Arguments

09-12-2025

Arguments

Interim Orders

07-08-2018
Evidence
09-04-2019
Evidence
23-09-2019
Evidence

The court dismissed the appeal against the plaintiff's right to the land. The court found that the plaintiff's survey and possession from 1993 were valid, and there were no boundary violations or encroachments on the defendant's property. The court rejected the defendant's counter-arguments regarding land area discrepancies and confirmed the plaintiff's title to the disputed land. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The court dismissed the appeal against the plaintiff's right to the land. The court found that the plaintiff's survey and possession from 1993 were valid, and there were no boundary violations or encroachments on the defendant's property. The court rejected the defendant's counter-arguments regarding land area discrepancies and confirmed the plaintiff's title to the disputed land. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Civil Court Junior Division , Umrer All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case