Archana Harichandra Patekar vs Vikas Sureshkumar Bhageriya Advocate - Adv. Shaha Sanjaykumar Chandulal — 18/2023

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 1. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 13th April 2026.

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHRG160001122023

Evidence

Next Hearing

13th April 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

24/2023

Filing Date

06-06-2023

Registration No

18/2023

Registration Date

06-06-2023

Court

Civil and Criminal Court, Pali

Judge

1-Civil Judge J.D And J.M.F.C Pali-Sudhgad

Acts & Sections

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Section 1

Petitioner(s)

Archana Harichandra Patekar

Adv. Sujay Tukaram Kumbhar

Respondent(s)

Vikas Sureshkumar Bhageriya Advocate - Adv. Shaha Sanjaykumar Chandulal

Ananta Bhiku Kadam

Sushila Damodar Patekar

Shakuntala Pandhurang Kadam

Sanjana Namdev Aarde

Shweta Ganpat Jodh

Pravin Pandhurang Kadam

Harshad Ananta Kadam

Devendra Ananta kadam

Manjula Damodar Patekar

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Civil Judge J.D And J.M.F.C Pali-Sudhgad

09-03-2026

Evidence

21-02-2026

For Referal to the Special Mediation Drive Mediation For the Nation _Unready

14-01-2026

For Referal to the Special Mediation Drive Mediation For the Nation _Unready

13-12-2025

Evidence

15-11-2025

Evidence

Interim Orders

02-05-2024
Order on T.I.

Summary: The Civil Judge rejected the plaintiff Archana Patekar's application for temporary injunction against defendants seeking to restrain them from alienating or interfering with her possession of ancestral land in Raigad district. The court found that the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case, as documentary evidence (7/12 extracts and mutation entry No.589) showed the property has been in the defendants' names since 1987, and the plaintiff had not challenged these records for 36 years. The balance of convenience favored the defendants, who purchased the property for ₹36 lakhs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The Civil Judge rejected the plaintiff Archana Patekar's application for temporary injunction against defendants seeking to restrain them from alienating or interfering with her possession of ancestral land in Raigad district. The court found that the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case, as documentary evidence (7/12 extracts and mutation entry No.589) showed the property has been in the defendants' names since 1987, and the plaintiff had not challenged these records for 36 years. The balance of convenience favored the defendants, who purchased the property for ₹36 lakhs. 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 and Criminal Court, Pali All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case