1 Sanjay Zipru Shewale 3 vs 1 Pandurang Ranu Shewale 11 Advocate - Kasliwal Sourabh S — 1700003/2009
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section ---. Status: Defence Evidence. Next hearing: 09th June 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHNS170000232009
Next Hearing
09th June 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
1700003/2009
Filing Date
12-01-2009
Registration No
1700003/2009
Registration Date
12-01-2009
Court
Civil and Criminal Court ,Nandgaon
Judge
1-CIVIL JUDGE J.D. AND JMFC
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
1 Sanjay Zipru Shewale 3
Adv. Choudhari Bhalchandra R
Vasant Zipru Shewale
Anil Zipru Shewale
Yeshodabai Zipru Shewale
Respondent(s)
1 Pandurang Ranu Shewale 11 Advocate - Kasliwal Sourabh S
Trambak Ganpat Shewale (Death)
Narmadabai Trambak Shewale
Kailas Trambak Shewale
Walmik Trambak Shewale
Vilas Trambak Shewale
Dilip Trambak Shewale
Shekhar Trambak Shewale
Sushabai @ Sushilabai Waman More
Chindha Zipru Shewale
Kavita Dilip Shewale
Vatsalabai Manik Bhad
Vimalbai Vishwanath Shewale
Sumanbai Javharlal Nikam
Vimalbai Prakash Aher
Kamalbai Jagan Jagtap
Kantabai Sudam Borse
Kalyabai Nathu Savkar
Archana Sahebrao Bhad
Hearing History
Judge: 1-CIVIL JUDGE J.D. AND JMFC
Defence Evidence
Defence Evidence
Defence Evidence
Defence Evidence
Evidence Part Heard
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 21-04-2026 | Defence Evidence | |
| 10-03-2026 | Defence Evidence | |
| 13-02-2026 | Defence Evidence | |
| 27-01-2026 | Defence Evidence | |
| 06-01-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
Interim Orders
Summary: The court allowed the plaintiff's application to add Defendant No. 9's heirs as parties to the suit, despite a delay of over two years in doing so. The court found the reasons for the delay to be valid and in the interest of justice, setting aside the abatement order previously passed against the plaintiff. The court directed the plaintiff to deposit Rs. 1,000 as security before obtaining permission to implead the heirs of the deceased defendant in the property partition and possession suit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The court allowed the plaintiff's application to add Defendant No. 9's heirs as parties to the suit, despite a delay of over two years in doing so. The court found the reasons for the delay to be valid and in the interest of justice, setting aside the abatement order previously passed against the plaintiff. The court directed the plaintiff to deposit Rs. 1,000 as security before obtaining permission to implead the heirs of the deceased defendant in the property partition and possession suit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts