Rakhmabai Vishwanath Pawar vs Ashok Devram Pawar — 229/2023

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section cpc. Status: Reply/Say. Next hearing: 23rd June 2026.

Reply/Say Next hearing 23-Jun-2026

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHNS160015442023

e-Filing Number

09-11-2023

Filing Number

321/2023

Filing Date

10-Nov-2023

Registration No

229/2023

Registration Date

10-Nov-2023

Court

Civil and Criminal Court ,Chandwad

Judge

2-Jt. Cjjd and JMFC, Chandwad

Last updated 18-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section cpc

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Rakhmabai Vishwanath Pawar

    Adv. Sachin Kulkarni

  2. 2.Pravin Vishwanath Pawar

    Adv. Sachin Kulkarni

  3. 3.Vanita Suresh Navale

    Adv. Sachin Kulkarni

  4. 4.Manisha Dnyaneshwar Chavhan

    Adv. Sachin Kulkarni

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Ashok Devram Pawar

  2. 2.Alka Ashok Pawar

  3. 3.Nivrutti Devram Pawar

  4. 4.Balu Devram Pawar

  5. 5.Bhimabai Shriram Chavhan

  6. 6.Popat Nivrutti Pawar

  7. 7.Mangala Balu Pawar

Case History

  1. 23-Jun-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 27-Apr-2026

    Reply/Say

    Jt. Cjjd and JMFC, Chandwad

  3. 17-Mar-2026

    Reply/Say

    Jt. Cjjd and JMFC, Chandwad

  4. 07-Feb-2026

    Reply/Say

    Jt. Cjjd and JMFC, Chandwad

  5. 06-Jan-2026

    Reply/Say

    Jt. Cjjd and JMFC, Chandwad

  6. 04-Dec-2025

    Reply/Say

    Jt. Cjjd and JMFC, Chandwad

  7. 15-Oct-2025

    Reply/Say

    Jt. Cjjd and JMFC, Chandwad

  8. 10-Sep-2025

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

    Case Summary: 229/2023 The court allowed the respondents' (Defendants 1, 2, and 5) application for condonation of delay in filing their written statement and reply, which was delayed by approximately 11 months and 8 days. The court found that despite receiving sufficient time after service of summons, the respondents failed to file their affidavit and statement timely, but granted them the opportunity to present their defense in accordance with natural justice principles. The respondents were ordered to pay Rs. 300/- to the petitioners as compensation for the delay, after which their written statement and reply would be accepted on record. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  9. 10-Sep-2025

    Reply/Say

    Jt. Cjjd and JMFC, Chandwad

  10. 25-Jul-2025

    Reply/Say

    Jt. Cjjd and JMFC, Chandwad

  11. 08-May-2025

    Reply/Say

    Cjjd and JMFC, Chandwad

  12. 28-Apr-2025

    Reply/Say

    Cjjd and JMFC, Chandwad

  13. 19-Mar-2025

    Reply/Say

    Cjjd and JMFC, Chandwad

  14. 04-Feb-2025

    Reply/Say

    2nd Jt. Cjjd and JMFC, Chandwad

  15. 02-Jan-2025

    Reply/Say

    2nd Jt. Cjjd and JMFC, Chandwad

  16. 02-Dec-2024

    Reply/Say

    2nd Jt. Cjjd and JMFC, Chandwad

  17. 07-Oct-2024

    Reply/Say

    2nd Jt. Cjjd and JMFC, Chandwad

  18. 13-Aug-2024

    Reply/Say

    2nd Jt. Cjjd and JMFC, Chandwad

  19. 18-Jul-2024

    Awaiting Summons

    2nd Jt. Cjjd and JMFC, Chandwad

  20. 27-Jun-2024

    Awaiting Summons

    2nd Jt. Cjjd and JMFC, Chandwad

  21. 10-Jun-2024

    Awaiting Summons

    2nd Jt. Cjjd and JMFC, Chandwad

  22. 03-Apr-2024

    Awaiting Summons

    2nd Jt. Cjjd and JMFC, Chandwad

  23. 27-Feb-2024

    Awaiting Summons

    2nd Jt. Cjjd and JMFC, Chandwad

  24. 10-Jan-2024

    Awaiting Summons

    2nd Jt. Cjjd and JMFC, Chandwad

  25. 09-Dec-2023

    Awaiting Summons

    2nd Jt. Cjjd and JMFC, Chandwad

  26. 10-Nov-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  27. 10-Nov-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. 229/2023

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 229/2023 The court allowed the respondents' (Defendants 1, 2, and 5) application for condonation of delay in filing their written statement and reply, which was delayed by approximately 11 months and 8 days. The court found that despite receiving sufficient time after service of summons, the respondents failed to file their affidavit and statement timely, but granted them the opportunity to present their defense in accordance with natural justice principles. The respondents were ordered to pay Rs. 300/- to the petitioners as compensation for the delay, after which their written statement and reply would be accepted on record. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case