Devgi Davlat Dhadve vs Savitri Babaji Shinde and 4 Advocate - Datar S.D. — 53/2018
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 1. Status: Argument on Exh.____Ready. Next hearing: 16th June 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHRG130005242018
Next Hearing
16th June 2026
Filing Number
167/2018
Filing Date
22-11-2018
Registration No
53/2018
Registration Date
22-11-2018
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)
Devgi Davlat Dhadve
Adv. Vadhavkar A.B.
Respondent(s)
Savitri Babaji Shinde and 4 Advocate - Datar S.D.
Hearing History
Judge: 1-CIVIL JUDGE J D AND J M F C SHRIWARDHAN
Argument on Exh.____Ready
Argument on Exh.____Ready
Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready
Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready
Evidence Part Heard
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 21-04-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Ready |
| 12-03-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Ready |
| 11-02-2026 | Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready |
| 20-01-2026 | Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready |
| 23-12-2025 | Evidence Part Heard |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: Devgi Davlat Dhadve v. Savitri Babaji Shinde (Case 53/2018) The petition filed by Devgi Davlat Dhadve challenging a property ("dava malkot") concerning land in Raigad district has been dismissed. The court found that the petitioner failed to establish her claim to the property as the first owner, and her delay in pursuing the matter over 25+ years undermined her legal standing. The court also noted procedural irregularities in the property transfer documents and determined that Respondent 5 had proper authority over the disputed property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Devgi Davlat Dhadve v. Savitri Babaji Shinde (Case 53/2018) The petition filed by Devgi Davlat Dhadve challenging a property ("dava malkot") concerning land in Raigad district has been dismissed. The court found that the petitioner failed to establish her claim to the property as the first owner, and her delay in pursuing the matter over 25+ years undermined her legal standing. The court also noted procedural irregularities in the property transfer documents and determined that Respondent 5 had proper authority over the disputed property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts