Rajiv Sadanand Amrute vs Gulnar Joher Nabi Advocate - Dharap D.D. — 66/2019
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 39 Rule 1,2. Status: List of Witness. Next hearing: 12th June 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHRG090006992019
Next Hearing
12th June 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
123/2019
Filing Date
23-08-2019
Registration No
66/2019
Registration Date
23-08-2019
Court
Civil Judge, J.D. and J.M.F.C., Roha
Judge
1-C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C Roha
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Rajiv Sadanand Amrute
Adv. Deshmukh N.G.
Respondent(s)
Gulnar Joher Nabi Advocate - Dharap D.D.
Hearing History
Judge: 1-C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C Roha
List of Witness
List of Witness
List of Witness
List of Witness
List of Witness
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 09-03-2026 | List of Witness | |
| 22-01-2026 | List of Witness | |
| 15-11-2025 | List of Witness | |
| 01-10-2025 | List of Witness | |
| 19-07-2025 | List of Witness |
Interim Orders
Summary The court rejected the plaintiff's application for appointment of a Court Commissioner under Order XXVI Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The court held that appointing a commissioner to determine the extent of encroachment on the disputed property would amount to collection of evidence, which is the parties' responsibility through oral and documentary evidence in the main suit for perpetual injunction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The court rejected the plaintiff's application for appointment of a Court Commissioner under Order XXVI Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The court held that appointing a commissioner to determine the extent of encroachment on the disputed property would amount to collection of evidence, which is the parties' responsibility through oral and documentary evidence in the main suit for perpetual 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