Yamunabai Madhav Kale vs Suryabhan Tatyaba Kale Advocate - Mogal Adesh S. — 77/2021
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 00. Status: Evidence Part Heard. Next hearing: 23rd June 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHNS130018982021
Next Hearing
23rd June 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
125/2021
Filing Date
23-09-2021
Registration No
77/2021
Registration Date
23-09-2021
Court
Civil and Criminal Court, Pimpalgaon Baswant
Judge
3-2ND JOINT CIVIL JUDGE JD AND JMFC PIMPALGAON
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Yamunabai Madhav Kale
Adv. Chavan Sangita L
Shivaji Madhav Kale
Manoj @ Manohar Madhav Kale
Mina Manohar Kale
Savita Daulat Gholap
Respondent(s)
Suryabhan Tatyaba Kale Advocate - Mogal Adesh S.
Laxmibai Suryabhan Kale
Rahul Suryabhan Kale
Vishal Suryabhan Kale
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 |
|---|---|---|
| 27-04-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 10-04-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 30-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 10-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 07-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: In Yamunabai v/s Suryabhan (R.C.S No.77/2021), the plaintiff's application seeking permission to lead secondary evidence under Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act was rejected. The court found that the original documents were public documents that could be easily obtained or certified, and therefore the plaintiff could not resort to secondary evidence as a last resort. The application was dismissed on grounds of lack of merit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: In Yamunabai v/s Suryabhan (R.C.S No.77/2021), the plaintiff's application seeking permission to lead secondary evidence under Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act was rejected. The court found that the original documents were public documents that could be easily obtained or certified, and therefore the plaintiff could not resort to secondary evidence as a last resort. The application was dismissed on grounds of lack of merit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts