Ganpat Vithal Patil vs Sau.Rajeshri Rajendra Patil Advocate - Shinde P. C. — 13/2017
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 1. Status: Additional W.S.. Next hearing: 24th April 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHRG080002182017
Next Hearing
24th April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
24/2017
Filing Date
15-02-2017
Registration No
13/2017
Registration Date
16-02-2017
Court
Civil Judge, J.D. and J.M.F.C., Khalpuar
Judge
1-1 Jt. Civil Judge J.D. J.M.F.C. Khalpuar
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Ganpat Vithal Patil
Adv. D.N Shette
Respondent(s)
Sau.Rajeshri Rajendra Patil Advocate - Shinde P. C.
shri rajendra Babu patil
shri Kaluram Balaram Dhamale
Hearing History
Judge: 1-1 Jt. Civil Judge J.D. J.M.F.C. Khalpuar
Additional W.S.
Additional W.S.
Additional W.S.
Additional W.S.
Additional W.S.
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 31-03-2026 | Additional W.S. | |
| 09-03-2026 | Additional W.S. | |
| 27-01-2026 | Additional W.S. | |
| 23-12-2025 | Additional W.S. | |
| 28-11-2025 | Additional W.S. |
Interim Orders
Court Order Summary Case: RCS 13/2017 | Joint Civil Judge, Khalapur | Date: 15.10.2018 Outcome: Temporary injunction application GRANTED. The court restrained defendants 1 and 2 from obstructing the plaintiff's access to a 10-foot right-of-way from Takai-Adoshi main road to Gut No. 227, effective until final disposal of the suit. The court found the plaintiff established a prima facie case, balance of convenience favored the plaintiff, and irreparable loss would result without the injunction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Order Summary Case: RCS 13/2017 | Joint Civil Judge, Khalapur | Date: 15.10.2018 Outcome: Temporary injunction application GRANTED. The court restrained defendants 1 and 2 from obstructing the plaintiff's access to a 10-foot right-of-way from Takai-Adoshi main road to Gut No. 227, effective until final disposal of the suit. The court found the plaintiff established a prima facie case, balance of convenience favored the plaintiff, and irreparable loss would result without the injunction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts