Ashok Motiram Garud vs Motiram Mangu Mali Advocate - Patil Ashokkumar R. — 1800046/2014
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section CivilProcedure. Status: Evidence Part Heard. Next hearing: 05th May 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHNS180004252014
Next Hearing
05th May 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
1800046/2014
Filing Date
14-03-2014
Registration No
1800046/2014
Registration Date
14-03-2014
Court
Civil and Criminal Court ,Kalwan
Judge
1-CIVIL JUDGE J.D. AND JMFC
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Ashok Motiram Garud
Adv. Junnare Vijay N.
Respondent(s)
Motiram Mangu Mali Advocate - Patil Ashokkumar R.
Hearing History
Judge: 1-CIVIL JUDGE J.D. AND JMFC
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 21-04-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 24-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 10-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 17-02-2026 | Evidence Part Heard | |
| 27-01-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
Interim Orders
Summary The court partially allowed the plaintiff's application to amend the plaint under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Amendments 3-7 were permitted to incorporate facts regarding a land sale transaction that occurred during the suit's pendency, allowing the plaintiff to add a claim that the sale deed is illegal and void. However, amendments 1-2 seeking to change the suit classification to "Special Civil Suit" and transfer jurisdiction to a higher court were rejected as the suit remains within the current court's pecuniary jurisdiction. The plaintiff was directed to pay Rs. 1,000 in costs to the defendants for the delay in filing the amendment application. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The court partially allowed the plaintiff's application to amend the plaint under Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Amendments 3-7 were permitted to incorporate facts regarding a land sale transaction that occurred during the suit's pendency, allowing the plaintiff to add a claim that the sale deed is illegal and void. However, amendments 1-2 seeking to change the suit classification to "Special Civil Suit" and transfer jurisdiction to a higher court were rejected as the suit remains within the current court's pecuniary jurisdiction. The plaintiff was directed to pay Rs. 1,000 in costs to the defendants for the delay in filing the amendment application. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts