Jalal Bashiruddin Kadiri vs Dipti Nandu Rajput alias Dipti Nilesh Bire Advocate - Santosh Maruti Sapte — 28/2024
Case under Specific Relief Act Section 34 and 38. Status: Verification. Next hearing: 30th June 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHRG130003572024
Next Hearing
30th June 2026
e-Filing Number
04-08-2024
Filing Number
62/2024
Filing Date
05-08-2024
Registration No
28/2024
Registration Date
05-08-2024
Court
Civil Judge, J.D. and J.M.F.C.Shriwardhan
Judge
1-CIVIL JUDGE J D AND J M F C SHRIWARDHAN
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Jalal Bashiruddin Kadiri
Adv. GHATTE RAFIQ AMIR
Respondent(s)
Dipti Nandu Rajput alias Dipti Nilesh Bire Advocate - Santosh Maruti Sapte
Nandu Antaram Rajput
Hearing History
Judge: 1-CIVIL JUDGE J D AND J M F C SHRIWARDHAN
Verification
Verification
Evidence
Order on Exh
Evidence
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 23-04-2026 | Verification | |
| 08-04-2026 | Verification | |
| 10-03-2026 | Evidence | |
| 16-02-2026 | Order on Exh | |
| 09-02-2026 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Summary: The court rejected the plaintiff's application to recast issue no. 1 and frame two additional issues in this declaration and injunction suit concerning an undivided share of land. The court held that issues must be framed based on pleadings under Order XIV of CPC, and since the plaintiff did not challenge the sale deed or claim relief regarding it, the proposed issues regarding the binding nature of the sale deed do not arise from the pleadings. The existing ownership issue sufficiently covers the controversy, making recasting unnecessary. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The court rejected the plaintiff's application to recast issue no. 1 and frame two additional issues in this declaration and injunction suit concerning an undivided share of land. The court held that issues must be framed based on pleadings under Order XIV of CPC, and since the plaintiff did not challenge the sale deed or claim relief regarding it, the proposed issues regarding the binding nature of the sale deed do not arise from the pleadings. The existing ownership issue sufficiently covers the controversy, making recasting unnecessary. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts