Janardan Nagu Thakur vs Khandu Nagu Thakur Advocate - Katke S.S. — 116/2017
Case under Maharashtra Court Fees Act Section 6(iv). Status: Report. Next hearing: 03rd July 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHRG060010262017
Next Hearing
03rd July 2026
Filing Number
221/2017
Filing Date
15-12-2017
Registration No
116/2017
Registration Date
15-12-2017
Court
Civil Judge J.D. and J.M.F.C., Pen
Judge
3-Jt.Civil Judge J D and J M F C Pen
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Janardan Nagu Thakur
Adv. Mokal P.D.
Respondent(s)
Khandu Nagu Thakur Advocate - Katke S.S.
Pushpa Krushna Thakur
Bhaskar Krushna Thakur
Bharati Vasant Dolkar(before marriage Bharati Krushna Thakur)
Hema Dnyaneshwar Mhataare (before marriage Hema Krushna Thakur)
Kanta Bhushan Mhatre (before marriage Kanta Krushna Thakur)
Sanjana Sachin Patil (before marriage Sanjana Krushna Thakur)
Vithabai Vinayak Naik
Hearing History
Judge: 3-Jt.Civil Judge J D and J M F C Pen
Report
Report
Report
Report
Report
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 08-05-2026 | Report |
| 12-03-2026 | Report |
| 29-01-2026 | Report |
| 06-12-2025 | Report |
| 21-11-2025 | Report |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: 116/2017 Petitioner: Janardan Nagu Thakur Respondents: Khandu Nagu Thakur (Advocate Katke S.S.), Pushpa Krishna Thakur, Bhaskar Krishna Thakur, and others Outcome: Petition allowed with directions. The court decreed that petitioner and respondents 1 & 8 each hold 1/4 share in the joint ancestral property, while respondents 2-7 each hold 1/24 share. Court commissioner appointed to demarcate shares of land property, with cost liability on respondents 2-7. Petitioner entitled to case costs from respondents 2-7. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: 116/2017 Petitioner: Janardan Nagu Thakur Respondents: Khandu Nagu Thakur (Advocate Katke S.S.), Pushpa Krishna Thakur, Bhaskar Krishna Thakur, and others Outcome: Petition allowed with directions. The court decreed that petitioner and respondents 1 & 8 each hold 1/4 share in the joint ancestral property, while respondents 2-7 each hold 1/24 share. Court commissioner appointed to demarcate shares of land property, with cost liability on respondents 2-7. Petitioner entitled to case costs from respondents 2-7. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts