Devnath Hiru Mahadik and 1 vs Kashinath Mahadeo Mahadik and 8 Advocate - Patil Rupesh S. — 29/2022

Case under Specific Relief Act Section 34,38. Status: Evidence Part Heard. Next hearing: 28th April 2026.

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHRG120004892022

Evidence Part Heard

Next Hearing

28th April 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

59/2022

Filing Date

25-11-2022

Registration No

29/2022

Registration Date

25-11-2022

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 34,38

Petitioner(s)

Devnath Hiru Mahadik and 1

Adv. Shedge V.S.

Sau. Sangita Santosh Chordhekar

Respondent(s)

Kashinath Mahadeo Mahadik and 8 Advocate - Patil Rupesh S.

Jitendra Janardan Mahadik

Adv. Patil Rupesh S.

Surendra Janardan Mahadik

Adv. Patil Rupesh S.

Jayashree Mahendra Chordhekar

Lalita Prakash Bhoir

Malati Raghunath Mali

Adv. Patil Rupesh S.

Nanda Rajesh Katkar

Adv. Patil Rupesh S.

Padaybai Balaram Patil

Lakhamubai Raghunath Thakur

Hearing History

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

16-04-2026

Evidence Part Heard

10-03-2026

Evidence Part Heard

12-02-2026

Evidence Part Heard

15-01-2026

Evidence Part Heard

18-12-2025

Evidence Part Heard

Interim Orders

21-10-2023
Order on T.I.

Court Order Summary Case: Devano v. Kashinath (Civil Suit No. 29/2022), Murud Court, Raigad District Outcome: The petition is partially allowed. The court granted temporary relief by restraining defendants from creating third-party interests or selling the disputed property pending final judgment. The plaintiff's claim to 1/3 share in the property was rejected on merits, with the court finding that the defendants' title was properly established through valid partition deeds and land records, and the plaintiff lacks legal rights to the property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Order Summary Case: Devano v. Kashinath (Civil Suit No. 29/2022), Murud Court, Raigad District Outcome: The petition is partially allowed. The court granted temporary relief by restraining defendants from creating third-party interests or selling the disputed property pending final judgment. The plaintiff's claim to 1/3 share in the property was rejected on merits, with the court finding that the defendants' title was properly established through valid partition deeds and land records, and the plaintiff lacks legal rights to the property. 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