Sulochana Yashwant Tungar vs Devidas Punja Mogal Advocate - Chavan Sangita L — 92/2019
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 00. Status: Evidence Part Heard. Next hearing: 12th June 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHNS130011462019
Next Hearing
12th June 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
152/2019
Filing Date
14-10-2019
Registration No
92/2019
Registration Date
14-10-2019
Court
Civil and Criminal Court, Pimpalgaon Baswant
Judge
3-2ND JOINT CIVIL JUDGE JD AND JMFC PIMPALGAON
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Sulochana Yashwant Tungar
Adv. Watpade Trambak E.
Lilabai Shivaji Gaidhani
Sharda Madhukar Jadhav
Respondent(s)
Devidas Punja Mogal Advocate - Chavan Sangita L
Yamunabai Madhav Kale
Shivaji Madhav Kale
Manoj Madhav Kale
Savita Daulat Gholap
Hearing History
Judge: 3-2ND JOINT CIVIL JUDGE JD AND JMFC PIMPALGAON
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 23-04-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 30-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 10-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 07-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 04-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
Interim Orders
Summary: The court allowed the plaintiff's application to lead secondary evidence regarding a special power of attorney dated 19.09.2019. The original document was lost, but a verified xerox copy authenticated by court authority was available on record. Under Sections 63(2) and 65 of the Indian Evidence Act, permission to produce secondary evidence was granted since the document's accuracy had been verified and the original was genuinely lost, not due to plaintiff's default. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The court allowed the plaintiff's application to lead secondary evidence regarding a special power of attorney dated 19.09.2019. The original document was lost, but a verified xerox copy authenticated by court authority was available on record. Under Sections 63(2) and 65 of the Indian Evidence Act, permission to produce secondary evidence was granted since the document's accuracy had been verified and the original was genuinely lost, not due to plaintiff's default. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts