Kumar Atharv Amit Jaiswal vs Shivkumar Ruplal Jaiswal Advocate - S. K. Likhite — 115/2016
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 1. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 01st April 2026.
R.C.S. - Reg.Civil Suit
CNR: MHNG100021642015
Filing Number
180/2016
Filing Date
21-07-2016
Registration No
115/2016
Registration Date
21-07-2016
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Umrer
Judge
1-JT.CIVIL JUDGE JR. DVN. J.M.F.C.UMRER
Decision Date
01st April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Kumar Atharv Amit Jaiswal
Adv. B. K. Pongde
Ku. Palak Amit Jaiswal
Adv. B. K. Pongde
Respondent(s)
Shivkumar Ruplal Jaiswal Advocate - S. K. Likhite
Amit Shivkumar Jaiswal
Adv. S. K. Likhite
Alok Shivkumar Jaiswal
Adv. S. K. Likhite
Sau. Priti Sanjay Jaiswal
Adv. S. K. Likhite
Krushnakumar Rupalalji Jaiswal
Ashokkumar Rupalalji Jaiswal
Hearing History
Judge: 1-JT.CIVIL JUDGE JR. DVN. J.M.F.C.UMRER
Disposed
Order
Order
Order
Arguments
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 01-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 25-03-2026 | Order |
| 13-03-2026 | Order |
| 10-03-2026 | Order |
| 26-02-2026 | Arguments |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The court dismissed the plaintiffs' suit seeking partition and separate possession of ancestral properties. The court found that the plaintiffs failed to prove the properties were ancestral/joint family property, as some properties were purchased by defendants after marriage using personal funds, and the plaintiffs could not establish their share or entitlement to partition. Both parties were ordered to bear their own legal costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Summary The court dismissed the plaintiffs' suit seeking partition and separate possession of ancestral properties. The court found that the plaintiffs failed to prove the properties were ancestral/joint family property, as some properties were purchased by defendants after marriage using personal funds, and the plaintiffs could not establish their share or entitlement to partition. Both parties were ordered to bear their own legal costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts