Bhim Ningappa Ghodke vs Raghu urf Raghunath Shivram Ghodke — 21/2025

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section O43Rule1. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED / REJECTED AFTER FULL TRIAL / HEARING on 18th April 2026.

Case disposed

M.C.A. - Misc.Civil Appeal

CNR: MHOS050009512025

e-Filing Number

29-09-2025

Filing Number

671/2025

Filing Date

14-Nov-2025

Registration No

21/2025

Registration Date

14-Nov-2025

Court

Additional District Judge , Omerga

Judge

1-District Judge-1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Omerga.

Decision Date

18-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED / REJECTED AFTER FULL TRIAL / HEARING

Last updated 23-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section O43Rule1

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Bhim Ningappa Ghodke

    Adv. Totla Akshay Pravinchandra

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Raghu urf Raghunath Shivram Ghodke

  2. 2.Sheshabai Biru Ghodke

  3. 3.Biru Raghunath Ghodke

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 18-Apr-2026

    Copy of Judgment

    Summary of Case 21/2025 Court Decision: The District Judge dismissed Bhim Ningappa Ghodke's appeal challenging the rejection of his interim injunction application. The court found that Ghodke failed to establish a prima facie case of encroachment, that the balance of convenience did not favor him, and that he did not prove irreparable loss. The defendants, who possess municipal approval for their construction and are at an advanced stage, were not enjoined from continuing work. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 18-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    District Judge-1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Omerga.

  4. 06-Apr-2026

    Judgment

    District Judge-1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Omerga.

  5. 01-Apr-2026

    Arguments

    District Judge-1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Omerga.

  6. 27-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    District Judge-1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Omerga.

  7. 24-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    District Judge-1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Omerga.

  8. 18-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    District Judge-1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Omerga.

  9. 13-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    District Judge-1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Omerga.

  10. 10-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    District Judge-1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Omerga.

  11. 04-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    District Judge-1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Omerga.

  12. 04-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    District Judge-1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Omerga.

  13. 02-Mar-2026

    Arguments

    District Judge-1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Omerga.

  14. 21-Feb-2026

    Arguments

    District Judge-1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Omerga.

  15. 16-Feb-2026

    Arguments

    District Judge-1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Omerga.

  16. 04-Feb-2026

    Arguments

    District Judge-1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Omerga.

  17. 31-Jan-2026

    Arguments

    District Judge-1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Omerga.

  18. 20-Jan-2026

    Arguments

    District Judge-1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Omerga.

  19. 09-Jan-2026

    Arguments

    District Judge-1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Omerga.

  20. 02-Jan-2026

    Arguments

    District Judge-1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Omerga.

  21. 23-Dec-2025

    Arguments

    District Judge-1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Omerga.

  22. 08-Dec-2025

    Arguments

    District Judge-1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Omerga.

  23. 01-Dec-2025

    Reply/Say

    District Judge-1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Omerga.

  24. 24-Nov-2025

    Reply/Say

    District Judge-1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Omerga.

  25. 19-Nov-2025

    Reply/Say

    District Judge-1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Omerga.

  26. 14-Nov-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  27. 14-Nov-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 21/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of Case 21/2025 Court Decision: The District Judge dismissed Bhim Ningappa Ghodke's appeal challenging the rejection of his interim injunction application. The court found that Ghodke failed to establish a prima facie case of encroachment, that the balance of convenience did not favor him, and that he did not prove irreparable loss. The defendants, who possess municipal approval for their construction and are at an advanced stage, were not enjoined from continuing work. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case