Usha Anand Jadhav etc vs Central Railway, Pune Division etc Advocate - Salunkhe Mangala Ganpatrao — 15/2022
Case under Public Premises (eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act Section 9. Status: Arguments. Next hearing: 07th April 2026.
Civil Appeal PPE - Civil Appeal under Public Premises Act
CNR: MHPU010092002022
Next Hearing
07th April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
4772/2022
Filing Date
20-05-2022
Registration No
15/2022
Registration Date
20-05-2022
Court
District and Session Court ,Pune
Judge
17-DISTRICT JUDGE - 1 AND ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE PUNE
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Usha Anand Jadhav etc
Adv. GHADYALE SUDHINDRA MANIK
Vanita Alias Manisha Anand Jadhav
Respondent(s)
Central Railway, Pune Division etc Advocate - Salunkhe Mangala Ganpatrao
Estate Officer, Central Railway, Pune Division
Adv. Salunkhe Mangala Ganpatrao
Divisional Railway Manager, Works Division Office
Adv. Salunkhe Mangala Ganpatrao
Senior Section Engineer (W) GPR
Adv. Salunkhe Mangala Ganpatrao
Hearing History
Judge: 17-DISTRICT JUDGE - 1 AND ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE PUNE
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 07-03-2026 | Arguments | |
| 16-02-2026 | Arguments | |
| 28-01-2026 | Arguments | |
| 22-01-2026 | Arguments | |
| 17-12-2025 | Arguments |
Interim Orders
Summary: The District Court rejected the appellants' application for appointment of a court receiver under Order XL of CPC in a Public Premises Eviction (PPE) Act appeal. The court found that since the respondents (Central Railway) contend the appellants are unauthorized occupants following the death of the original lessee, no basis exists to direct acceptance of license fees or appoint a receiver. The application stands rejected as it is improper under the PPE Act framework (13 June 2024). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The District Court rejected the appellants' application for appointment of a court receiver under Order XL of CPC in a Public Premises Eviction (PPE) Act appeal. The court found that since the respondents (Central Railway) contend the appellants are unauthorized occupants following the death of the original lessee, no basis exists to direct acceptance of license fees or appoint a receiver. The application stands rejected as it is improper under the PPE Act framework (13 June 2024). This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts