Liladhar Balaram Goyaji etc vs Chintamani Bhiku Goyaji etc Advocate - Deshpande A.V. — 25/2018

Case under Specific Relief Act Section 34. Status: Filing of Say on Exh___Ready. Next hearing: 18th June 2026.

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHRG120003422018

Filing of Say on Exh___Ready

Next Hearing

18th June 2026

Filing Number

38/2018

Filing Date

02-11-2018

Registration No

25/2018

Registration Date

02-11-2018

Court

Civil Judge, J.D. and J.M.F.C.,Murud

Judge

1-Civil Judge Jr. Dvn. and J. M. F. C. Murud

Acts & Sections

Specific Relief Act Section 34

Petitioner(s)

Liladhar Balaram Goyaji etc

Adv. Tambadkar M. J.

Respondent(s)

Chintamani Bhiku Goyaji etc Advocate - Deshpande A.V.

Rohidas Balaram Goyaji

Suresh Balaram Goyaji

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Civil Judge Jr. Dvn. and J. M. F. C. Murud

07-05-2026

Filing of Say on Exh___Ready

16-04-2026

Arguments

12-03-2026

Arguments

05-03-2026

Evidence Part Heard

09-02-2026

Evidence Part Heard

Interim Orders

02-05-2022
Order on T.I.
02-05-2022
Order on T.I.
22-09-2025
Order on Exhibit

Case Summary: 25/2018 Liladhar and Anr. Vs. Chintamani and Ors. The court allowed Respondent No. 2's application and set aside the "evidence closed" order dated 19.06.2025, granting him another opportunity to file evidence. The court found that sufficient opportunity had been given earlier and that allowing evidence would serve justice on merits. Respondent No. 2 was ordered to pay ₹600 as costs to the plaintiff for the delay caused in proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 25/2018 Liladhar and Anr. Vs. Chintamani and Ors. The court allowed Respondent No. 2's application and set aside the "evidence closed" order dated 19.06.2025, granting him another opportunity to file evidence. The court found that sufficient opportunity had been given earlier and that allowing evidence would serve justice on merits. Respondent No. 2 was ordered to pay ₹600 as costs to the plaintiff for the delay caused in proceedings. 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

Civil Judge, J.D. and J.M.F.C.,Murud All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case