Nanasaheb Trimbak Date vs Janardan Ramchandra Dhumane Advocate - Gaikwad Shivaji V. — 61/2025
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 47,151Order21Rule26,29. Status: Issues. Next hearing: 05th May 2026.
Civil M.A. - Civil Misc. Application
CNR: MHNS140016282025
Next Hearing
05th May 2026
e-Filing Number
30-10-2025
Filing Number
404/2025
Filing Date
04-11-2025
Registration No
61/2025
Registration Date
04-11-2025
Court
Civil and Criminal Court ,Dindori
Judge
2-CIVIL JUDGE J.D. AND JMFC DINDORI
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Nanasaheb Trimbak Date
Adv. Deshpande Neeraj J.
Maruti Trimbak Date
Adv. Deshpande Neeraj J.
Jhelubai Bhikaji Bankar(Legal Heir)
Adv. Neeraj Deshpande3.
Bhikaji Khanderao Bankar
Adv. Deshpande Neeraj J.3.
Eknath Bhikaji Bankar
Adv. Deshpande Neeraj J.3.
Savita Tanaji Tidke
Adv. Deshpande Neeraj J.
Baby Kacharu Tidke
Adv. Deshpande Neeraj J.
Nanubai Ramchandra Daund(Legal Heir)
Adv. Neeraj Deshpande5.
Kailash Ramchandra Daund
Adv. Deshpande Neeraj J.5.
Alka Bhimrao Tajanpure
Adv. Deshpande Neeraj J.5.
Manda Shivaram Kunde
Adv. Deshpande Neeraj J.
Sushilabai Tukaram Pawar
Adv. Deshpande Neeraj J.
Respondent(s)
Janardan Ramchandra Dhumane Advocate - Gaikwad Shivaji V.
Ramesh Ramchandra Dhumane
Adv. Gaikwad Shivaji V.3.
Popat Malhari Barde
Adv. Baste Bakerao V.3.
Sulochana Dattatray Fugat
Adv. Baste Bakerao V.3.
Anusya Ramdas Aware
Adv. Baste Bakerao V.3.
Vimal Santosh Gadkari
Adv. Baste Bakerao V.
Anusaya Ganpat Dighe
Hearing History
Judge: 2-CIVIL JUDGE J.D. AND JMFC DINDORI
Issues
Order on Exh
Order on Exh
Order on Exh
Order on Exh
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 18-04-2026 | Issues | |
| 17-04-2026 | Order on Exh | |
| 06-04-2026 | Order on Exh | |
| 04-04-2026 | Order on Exh | |
| 18-03-2026 | Order on Exh |
Interim Orders
Summary: The Civil Court rejected the applicants' petition seeking to stay execution of a 1997 partition decree and a 2014 related order. The applicants (legal heirs of the original plaintiff) sought to amend their inherited share from 1/15th to 1/5th based on the 2005 amendment to the Hindu Succession Act, arguing the final decree remained pending. The court held that the applicants obtained possession of land in 2011 based on a clerical error in the decree, did not raise the legal amendment argument during earlier proceedings, and lacked "clean hands" to seek such relief. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The Civil Court rejected the applicants' petition seeking to stay execution of a 1997 partition decree and a 2014 related order. The applicants (legal heirs of the original plaintiff) sought to amend their inherited share from 1/15th to 1/5th based on the 2005 amendment to the Hindu Succession Act, arguing the final decree remained pending. The court held that the applicants obtained possession of land in 2011 based on a clerical error in the decree, did not raise the legal amendment argument during earlier proceedings, and lacked "clean hands" to seek such relief. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts