Gali Vyankat Alias Venkata Sai Yashwantraj vs Rajkumar Hiraman Patil Advocate - SONWANE SWAPNIL SUBHASH — 17/2025

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section Order39,151. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 08th July 2026.

Evidence Next hearing 08-Jul-2026

Spl.C.S. - Spl.Civ.Suit

CNR: MHNG130001392025

e-Filing Number

21-01-2025

Filing Number

49/2025

Filing Date

21-Jan-2025

Registration No

17/2025

Registration Date

21-Jan-2025

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Ramtek

Judge

17-Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

Last updated 24-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section Order39,151
Specific Relief Act Section 22

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Gali Vyankat Alias Venkata Sai Yashwantraj

    Adv. A.G. Mahajan

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Rajkumar Hiraman Patil Advocate - SONWANE SWAPNIL SUBHASH

  2. 2.Dilip Hiraman Patil

  3. 3.Ravindra Hiraman Patil

    Adv. A.V. Gajbhiye

  4. 4.Shashikala Tulsidas Patil

  5. 5.Pragati Sachin Bhagat

  6. 6.Swati Kirtikumar Khobragade

Case History

  1. 08-Jul-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 18-Mar-2026

    Order on T.I.View PDF

    SUMMARY The Civil Judge Senior Division at Ramtek allowed the plaintiff's application for interim injunction under Order 39 Rule 1(a) of the Code of Civil Procedure. The court restrained the defendants from alienating 0.81 hectares of agricultural land (Survey No. 21/1) to any third party until final disposal of the suit seeking specific performance of a sale agreement dated June 10, 2022. The court found that the plaintiff had a prima facie case, the balance of convenience favored him, and he would suffer irreparable loss if the relief was denied, as the defendants had failed to execute the sale deed despite accepting earnest money of Rs. 8 lakhs and initially delivering possession. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 18-Mar-2026

    Evidence

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  4. 12-Mar-2026

    Order

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  5. 06-Mar-2026

    Order

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  6. 26-Feb-2026

    Order

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  7. 18-Feb-2026

    Order

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  8. 04-Feb-2026

    Order

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  9. 28-Jan-2026

    Order

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  10. 20-Jan-2026

    Order

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  11. 14-Jan-2026

    Hearing

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  12. 17-Dec-2025

    Hearing

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  13. 10-Dec-2025

    Hearing

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  14. 18-Nov-2025

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  15. 18-Nov-2025

    Hearing

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  16. 31-Oct-2025

    Ex-Parte Order

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  17. 08-Oct-2025

    Ex-Parte Order

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  18. 23-Sep-2025

    Ex-Parte Order

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  19. 13-Aug-2025

    Awaiting Summons

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  20. 07-Jul-2025

    Awaiting Summons

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  21. 25-Jun-2025

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  22. 25-Jun-2025

    Awaiting Summons

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  23. 11-Jun-2025

    Order

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  24. 06-May-2025

    W.S. and Say

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  25. 24-Apr-2025

    W.S. and Say

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  26. 15-Apr-2025

    Reply/Say

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  27. 06-Mar-2025

    Reply/Say

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  28. 07-Feb-2025

    Awaiting Notice

    Civil Judge Sr. Dn., Ramtek

  29. 21-Jan-2025

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  30. 21-Jan-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  31. 21-Jan-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 17/2025

casestatus.in Summary

SUMMARY The Civil Judge Senior Division at Ramtek allowed the plaintiff's application for interim injunction under Order 39 Rule 1(a) of the Code of Civil Procedure. The court restrained the defendants from alienating 0.81 hectares of agricultural land (Survey No. 21/1) to any third party until final disposal of the suit seeking specific performance of a sale agreement dated June 10, 2022. The court found that the plaintiff had a prima facie case, the balance of convenience favored him, and he would suffer irreparable loss if the relief was denied, as the defendants had failed to execute the sale deed despite accepting earnest money of Rs. 8 lakhs and initially delivering possession. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case