Ashok Manoharro Devdhar vs Chief Officer Municipal Council Siu — 7/2024

Case under Indian Evidence Act Section 108. Status: Argument on Exh.____Unready. Next hearing: 21st August 2026.

Argument on Exh.____Unready Next hearing 21-Aug-2026 this date has passed

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHPA150000182024

e-Filing Number

02-01-2024

Filing Number

14/2024

Filing Date

03-Jan-2024

Registration No

7/2024

Registration Date

03-Jan-2024

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Sailu

Judge

3-Extra Jt. Civil Judge J.D. and J.M.F.C.Sailu

Last updated 24-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Indian Evidence Act Section 108
Specific Relief Act Section 34

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Ashok Manoharro Devdhar

    Adv. MAGAR LAXMAN TUKARAM

  2. 2.Savita Devdhar

    Adv. MAGAR LAXMAN TUKARAM

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Chief Officer Municipal Council Siu

Case History

  1. 21-Aug-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 19-Jun-2026

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Extra Jt. Civil Judge J.D. and J.M.F.C.Sailu

  3. 20-Mar-2026

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Extra Jt. Civil Judge J.D. and J.M.F.C.Sailu

  4. 20-Jan-2026

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Extra Jt. Civil Judge J.D. and J.M.F.C.Sailu

  5. 20-Nov-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Jt. Civil Judge Junior Division and J.m.f.c., Sailu

  6. 16-Sep-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Jt. Civil Judge Junior Division and J.m.f.c., Sailu

  7. 16-Jul-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Jt. Civil Judge Junior Division and J.m.f.c., Sailu

  8. 16-Jun-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Jt. Civil Judge Junior Division and J.m.f.c., Sailu

  9. 16-Apr-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Jt. Civil Judge Junior Division and J.m.f.c., Sailu

  10. 17-Mar-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Jt. Civil Judge Junior Division and J.m.f.c., Sailu

  11. 07-Feb-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Jt. Civil Judge Junior Division and J.m.f.c., Sailu

  12. 08-Nov-2024

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge Junior Division and J.m.f.c., Sailu

  13. 08-Oct-2024

    Steps

    Jt. Civil Judge Junior Division and J.m.f.c., Sailu

  14. 06-Sep-2024

    Steps

    Jt. Civil Judge Junior Division and J.m.f.c., Sailu

  15. 27-Aug-2024

    Steps

    Jt. Civil Judge Junior Division and J.m.f.c., Sailu

  16. 22-Jul-2024

    Order on Exhibit

    Case 7/2024 Summary: Defendant No. 2 sought permission to file a written statement after a "no written statement" order was passed against her on 04.05.2024 for failing to file within the stipulated period, citing absence from station. The court allowed the application and set aside the no written statement order, finding that principles of natural justice require fair opportunity to defend, though the defendant's reasons were not fully justifiable. Defendant No. 2 was required to pay Rs. 100 costs to the plaintiff as a condition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  17. 22-Jul-2024

    Steps

    Jt. Civil Judge Junior Division and J.m.f.c., Sailu

  18. 15-Jul-2024

    Filing of Say on Exh___Unready

    Jt. Civil Judge Junior Division and J.m.f.c., Sailu

  19. 04-May-2024

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge Junior Division and J.m.f.c., Sailu

  20. 28-Mar-2024

    Written Statement

    Civil Judge Junior Division and J.m.f.c., Sailu

  21. 06-Feb-2024

    Written Statement

    Civil Judge Junior Division and J.m.f.c., Sailu

  22. 03-Jan-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  23. 03-Jan-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 7/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Case 7/2024 Summary: Defendant No. 2 sought permission to file a written statement after a "no written statement" order was passed against her on 04.05.2024 for failing to file within the stipulated period, citing absence from station. The court allowed the application and set aside the no written statement order, finding that principles of natural justice require fair opportunity to defend, though the defendant's reasons were not fully justifiable. Defendant No. 2 was required to pay Rs. 100 costs to the plaintiff as a condition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case