Mahesh Gajanan Mali vs Amol Chandrakant Bhoir Advocate - Makani S.D. — 1131/2023

Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138. Status: Evidence Part Heard. Next hearing: 08th June 2026.

S.C.C. - Summons/Summary Criminal Case

CNR: MHRG030020032023

Evidence Part Heard

Next Hearing

08th June 2026

e-Filing Number

22-10-2023

Filing Number

1661/2023

Filing Date

23-10-2023

Registration No

1131/2023

Registration Date

23-10-2023

Court

Chief Judicial Magistrate , Raigarh

Judge

1-Chief Judicial Magistrate Raigad-ALIBAG

Acts & Sections

NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT Section 138

Petitioner(s)

Mahesh Gajanan Mali

Adv. THAKUR NABHESH BHASKAR

Respondent(s)

Amol Chandrakant Bhoir Advocate - Makani S.D.

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Chief Judicial Magistrate Raigad-ALIBAG

27-04-2026

Evidence Part Heard

06-04-2026

Evidence Part Heard

10-03-2026

Evidence Part Heard

23-02-2026

Evidence Part Heard

22-01-2026

Evidence Part Heard

Interim Orders

05-12-2025
Evidence

Summary This is a civil case (Civil Suit No. 1131/2023) from the Raigad District Court concerning a money dispute. The court dismissed the plaintiff's suit entirely (उलटपास पूर्ण = complete reversal/dismissal), finding that the defendant had already deposited the claimed amount of ₹4,50,000 in court as ordered. The judgment held that the plaintiff failed to prove the defendant's liability or produce necessary evidence, and therefore the suit was rejected on merits without any relief to the plaintiff. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary This is a civil case (Civil Suit No. 1131/2023) from the Raigad District Court concerning a money dispute. The court dismissed the plaintiff's suit entirely (उलटपास पूर्ण = complete reversal/dismissal), finding that the defendant had already deposited the claimed amount of ₹4,50,000 in court as ordered. The judgment held that the plaintiff failed to prove the defendant's liability or produce necessary evidence, and therefore the suit was rejected on merits without any relief to the plaintiff. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Chief Judicial Magistrate , Raigarh All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case