Sudhakar Balu Chaudhari vs Anjana Kashinath Pawar Advocate - Sonawane Deep N — 37/2022

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section Injunction. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 08th July 2026.

Evidence Next hearing 08-Jul-2026

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHNS180003782022

Filing Number

44/2022

Filing Date

14-Mar-2022

Registration No

37/2022

Registration Date

14-Mar-2022

Court

Civil and Criminal Court ,Kalwan

Judge

2-Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

Last updated 18-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section Injunction

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Sudhakar Balu Chaudhari

    Adv. Suryawanshi Manoj N.

  2. 2.Suresh Balu Chaudhari

  3. 3.Suman Balu Chaudhari

  4. 4.Gita Suresh Chaudhari

  5. 5.Vanita Sahebrao Gaikwad

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Anjana Kashinath Pawar Advocate - Sonawane Deep N

  2. 2.Dharmendra Nana Chaudhari

  3. 3.Laxmi Dharmendra Chaudhari

  4. 4.Pravin Dharmendra Chaudhari

Case History

  1. 08-Jul-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 05-May-2026

    Evidence

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  3. 17-Mar-2026

    Evidence

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  4. 27-Jan-2026

    Evidence

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  5. 09-Dec-2025

    Evidence

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  6. 14-Oct-2025

    Evidence

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  7. 26-Aug-2025

    Evidence

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  8. 01-Jul-2025

    Evidence

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  9. 22-Apr-2025

    Evidence

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  10. 11-Feb-2025

    Evidence

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  11. 07-Jan-2025

    Evidence

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  12. 13-Nov-2024

    Evidence

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  13. 07-Oct-2024

    Evidence

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  14. 06-Sep-2024

    Evidence

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  15. 29-Jul-2024

    Evidence

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  16. 21-Jun-2024

    Evidence

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  17. 24-Apr-2024

    Evidence

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  18. 13-Mar-2024

    Evidence

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  19. 14-Feb-2024

    Evidence

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  20. 17-Jan-2024

    Evidence

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  21. 15-Dec-2023

    Evidence

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  22. 10-Nov-2023

    Evidence

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  23. 29-Sep-2023

    Evidence

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  24. 21-Aug-2023

    Evidence

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  25. 20-Jul-2023

    Evidence

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  26. 15-Jun-2023

    Evidence

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  27. 12-Apr-2023

    Evidence

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  28. 09-Mar-2023

    Hearing

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  29. 01-Feb-2023

    Hearing

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  30. 06-Jan-2023

    Hearing

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  31. 25-Nov-2022

    List of Witness

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  32. 13-Oct-2022

    List of Witness

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  33. 16-Sep-2022

    List of Witness

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  34. 03-Aug-2022

    List of Witness

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  35. 27-Jul-2022

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

    Case Summary: R.C.S. No. 37/2022 The court rejected the defendants' application to return the plaint on jurisdictional grounds. The defendants argued the Forest Department and SDO, Nashik must be added as parties since the suit property (forest land allotted to a Scheduled Tribe member) reflects the Maharashtra Government's name in the 7/12 extract. The court held that since plaintiffs sought only to challenge the validity of a Will dated 30/06/2020 and did not claim relief against the Government or Forest Department, the suit was properly filed and any decree could be executed without their involvement. Application dismissed; no cost order imposed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  36. 27-Jul-2022

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  37. 22-Jul-2022

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  38. 16-Jul-2022

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  39. 24-Jun-2022

    W.S. and Say

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  40. 10-Jun-2022

    Awaiting Summons

    Joint CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  41. 29-Apr-2022

    Awaiting Summons

    CIVIL Judge J.D. And JMFC

  42. 14-Mar-2022

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  43. 14-Mar-2022

    Case filed

    Registration No. 37/2022

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: R.C.S. No. 37/2022 The court rejected the defendants' application to return the plaint on jurisdictional grounds. The defendants argued the Forest Department and SDO, Nashik must be added as parties since the suit property (forest land allotted to a Scheduled Tribe member) reflects the Maharashtra Government's name in the 7/12 extract. The court held that since plaintiffs sought only to challenge the validity of a Will dated 30/06/2020 and did not claim relief against the Government or Forest Department, the suit was properly filed and any decree could be executed without their involvement. Application dismissed; no cost order imposed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case