Meena Waman Sonekar vs Madan Rawan Hiware Advocate - N.P.Bagde — 320/2017

Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138. Status: Arguments. Next hearing: 28th May 2026.

S.C.C. - Sum Case

CNR: MHNG130031882015

Arguments

Next Hearing

28th May 2026

Filing Number

501/2017

Filing Date

18-05-2017

Registration No

320/2017

Registration Date

20-05-2017

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Ramtek

Judge

2-2nd Jt. Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C.

Acts & Sections

NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT Section 138

Petitioner(s)

Meena Waman Sonekar

Adv. P.B.Bante

Respondent(s)

Madan Rawan Hiware Advocate - N.P.Bagde

Hearing History

Judge: 2-2nd Jt. Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C.

23-04-2026

Arguments

09-04-2026

Arguments

12-03-2026

Arguments

26-02-2026

Arguments

05-02-2026

Arguments

Interim Orders

13-04-2018
Evidence
15-03-2019
Evidence
18-03-2019
Evidence
03-12-2022
Evidence
15-02-2024
Evidence

Summary This is a civil court order (S.P.O. No. 320/2017) from the Ramtek Court involving Mimina v. Madan, decided on 15/02/2024. The court allowed the plaintiff's petition, accepting her sworn statements and evidence regarding financial disputes and property matters with the defendant Arun Chavan, including claims related to loans, home construction expenses, and dowry amounts totaling approximately Rs. 1,60,000. The court found the plaintiff's testimony credible and rejected the defendant's counter-arguments, directing appropriate remedies on the disputed financial transactions. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary This is a civil court order (S.P.O. No. 320/2017) from the Ramtek Court involving Mimina v. Madan, decided on 15/02/2024. The court allowed the plaintiff's petition, accepting her sworn statements and evidence regarding financial disputes and property matters with the defendant Arun Chavan, including claims related to loans, home construction expenses, and dowry amounts totaling approximately Rs. 1,60,000. The court found the plaintiff's testimony credible and rejected the defendant's counter-arguments, directing appropriate remedies on the disputed financial transactions. 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 , Ramtek All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case