Mohan Ramchandra Gaikwad vs Controller Of Unauthorised Construction (south) — 177/2023

Case under Specific Relief (Amendment) Act Section 31. Status: Argument on Exh.____Unready. Next hearing: 18th June 2026.

Argument on Exh.____Unready Next hearing 18-Jun-2026 this date has passed

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHRG040017182023

e-Filing Number

02-05-2023

Filing Number

40755/2023

Filing Date

03-May-2023

Registration No

177/2023

Registration Date

03-May-2023

Court

Civil Court Senior Division, Panvel

Judge

2-5th Jt.Civil Judge, Senior Division and Add.CJM Panvel

Last updated 30-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Specific Relief (Amendment) Act Section 31

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Mohan Ramchandra Gaikwad

    Adv. SHELAR GANESH HARISHCHANDRA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Controller Of Unauthorised Construction (south)

Case History

  1. 18-Jun-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 16-Apr-2026

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    5th Jt.Civil Judge, Senior Division and Add.CJM Panvel

  3. 12-Mar-2026

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    5th Jt.Civil Judge, Senior Division and Add.CJM Panvel

  4. 24-Jan-2026

    Hearing Without W.S.

    5th Jt.Civil Judge, Senior Division and Add.CJM Panvel

  5. 15-Jan-2026

    Hearing Without W.S.

    5th Jt.Civil Judge, Senior Division and Add.CJM Panvel

  6. 27-Nov-2025

    Hearing Without W.S.

    5th Jt.Civil Judge, Senior Division and Add.CJM Panvel

  7. 09-Oct-2025

    Hearing Without W.S.

    5th Jt.Civil Judge, Senior Division and Add.CJM Panvel

  8. 28-Aug-2025

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

    Summary: R.C.S. No. 177/2023 The court granted the defendants' application to set aside the "no written statement" (no WS) order dated 14.09.2023. The court accepted the defendants' explanation that, as CIDCO officials engaged in unauthorized construction removal activities, they were unable to timely collect necessary documents to file their written statement within the prescribed period. The 57-day delay was condoned, and the no WS order was set aside, subject to the defendants paying Rs. 1,000 as cost to TLSA, Panvel. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  9. 28-Aug-2025

    Hearing Without W.S.

    5th Jt.Civil Judge, Senior Division and Add.CJM Panvel

  10. 24-Apr-2025

    Hearing Without W.S.

    CIVIL Judge S.D. Panvel

  11. 30-Jan-2025

    Hearing Without W.S.

    CIVIL Judge S.D. Panvel

  12. 16-Jan-2025

    Hearing Without W.S.

    CIVIL Judge S.D. Panvel

  13. 12-Jul-2024

    Hearing Without W.S.

    CIVIL Judge S.D. Panvel

  14. 20-Jun-2024

    Hearing Without W.S.

    CIVIL Judge S.D. Panvel

  15. 18-Apr-2024

    Hearing Without W.S.

    CIVIL Judge S.D. Panvel

  16. 28-Mar-2024

    Hearing Without W.S.

    CIVIL Judge S.D. Panvel

  17. 01-Feb-2024

    Hearing Without W.S.

    CIVIL Judge S.D. Panvel

  18. 11-Jan-2024

    Hearing Without W.S.

    CIVIL Judge S.D. Panvel

  19. 07-Dec-2023

    Hearing Without W.S.

    CIVIL Judge S.D. Panvel

  20. 26-Oct-2023

    Hearing Without W.S.

    CIVIL Judge S.D. Panvel

  21. 12-Oct-2023

    Hearing Without W.S.

    CIVIL Judge S.D. Panvel

  22. 14-Sep-2023

    Hearing Without W.S.

    CIVIL Judge S.D. Panvel

  23. 24-Aug-2023

    Written Statement

    CIVIL Judge S.D. Panvel

  24. 10-Aug-2023

    Written Statement

    CIVIL Judge S.D. Panvel

  25. 06-Jul-2023

    Written Statement

    CIVIL Judge S.D. Panvel

  26. 20-Jun-2023

    Written Statement

    CIVIL Judge S.D. Panvel

  27. 05-Jun-2023

    Written Statement

    CIVIL Judge S.D. Panvel

  28. 29-May-2023

    Awaiting Notice

    CIVIL Judge S.D. Panvel

  29. 04-May-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  30. 03-May-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. 177/2023

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: R.C.S. No. 177/2023 The court granted the defendants' application to set aside the "no written statement" (no WS) order dated 14.09.2023. The court accepted the defendants' explanation that, as CIDCO officials engaged in unauthorized construction removal activities, they were unable to timely collect necessary documents to file their written statement within the prescribed period. The 57-day delay was condoned, and the no WS order was set aside, subject to the defendants paying Rs. 1,000 as cost to TLSA, Panvel. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case