Hari Pundlik Malsane vs Pundlik Madhav Kedare Advocate - chavan Shailesh B. — 97/2025

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 139. Status: Issues. Next hearing: 03rd July 2026.

Issues Next hearing 03-Jul-2026 this date has passed

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHNS140005242025

e-Filing Number

19-04-2025

Filing Number

129/2025

Filing Date

25-Apr-2025

Registration No

97/2025

Registration Date

25-Apr-2025

Court

Civil and Criminal Court ,Dindori

Judge

3-Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC Dindori

Last updated 29-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 139

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Hari Pundlik Malsane

    Adv. Ugale Vitthal R.

  2. 2.Rambhau Pundlik Malsane

    Adv. Ugale Vitthal R.

  3. 3.Rajaram Pundlik Malsane

    Adv. Ugale Vitthal R.

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Pundlik Madhav Kedare Advocate - chavan Shailesh B.

  2. 2.Kashinath Bhika Kedare

    Adv. chavan Shailesh B.

  3. 3.Nivrutti Namdev Kedare

    Adv. chavan Shailesh B.

  4. 4.Waman Madhav Kedare

  5. 5.Yashwant Bhagwat Kedare

    Adv. chavan Shailesh B.

  6. 6.Nigdol Various Executive Cooperative Society Ltd. Nigdol,

Case History

  1. 03-Jul-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 27-Mar-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

    Summary This is a property dispute case from a District Court in Maharashtra (Dist. DH03260) dated 27/03/2026, heard in Marathi. The court partially allowed the plaintiff's petition while partially dismissing the defendants' (Respondents 1-5) counter-claims. The court ordered that defendants are barred from interfering with the plaintiff's property rights in the disputed land (Plot 1A, measuring 0.03-19 acres), but directed that the final decision on the competing claims to the property will be determined in the main suit proceedings. The court also issued directions regarding the plaintiff's entitlement to possession of a portion of the land (80R area) while reserving judgment on other contested boundary issues. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 27-Mar-2026

    Issues

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC Dindori

  4. 23-Mar-2026

    Order on Exh

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC Dindori

  5. 18-Mar-2026

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC Dindori

  6. 12-Mar-2026

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC Dindori

  7. 11-Mar-2026

    Reply Unready

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC Dindori

  8. 10-Mar-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  9. 10-Mar-2026

    Reply Unready

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC Dindori

  10. 06-Mar-2026

    W.S. and Say

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC Dindori

  11. 24-Feb-2026

    W.S. and Say

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC Dindori

  12. 23-Jan-2026

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  13. 23-Jan-2026

    W.S. and Say

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC Dindori

  14. 16-Jan-2026

    W.S. and Say

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC Dindori

  15. 02-Jan-2026

    W.S. and Say

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC Dindori

  16. 12-Dec-2025

    Awaiting Summons

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC Dindori

  17. 21-Nov-2025

    Awaiting Summons

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC Dindori

  18. 29-Oct-2025

    Awaiting Summons

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC Dindori

  19. 25-Aug-2025

    Unready Board

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC Dindori

  20. 13-Jun-2025

    Unready Board

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC Dindori

  21. 25-Apr-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  22. 25-Apr-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 97/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Summary This is a property dispute case from a District Court in Maharashtra (Dist. DH03260) dated 27/03/2026, heard in Marathi. The court partially allowed the plaintiff's petition while partially dismissing the defendants' (Respondents 1-5) counter-claims. The court ordered that defendants are barred from interfering with the plaintiff's property rights in the disputed land (Plot 1A, measuring 0.03-19 acres), but directed that the final decision on the competing claims to the property will be determined in the main suit proceedings. The court also issued directions regarding the plaintiff's entitlement to possession of a portion of the land (80R area) while reserving judgment on other contested boundary issues. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case