Shri. Parshuram Shiva Thombare and 14 vs Shri. Waman Devaji Thombre Advocate - Kunte R. M. — 20/2016

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 22. Status: Issues. Next hearing: 05th May 2026.

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHRG160001462016

Issues

Next Hearing

05th May 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

28/2016

Filing Date

11-07-2016

Registration No

20/2016

Registration Date

11-07-2016

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 22

Petitioner(s)

Shri. Parshuram Shiva Thombare and 14

Adv. Joshi S. N.

smt. Nanda @ Shashikala Shahaji Thombre

Shri. Satish Shahaji Thombre

Smt. Sharmila Shahaji Thombre

Shalini Shahaji Thombre

Shri. Datta Shiva Thombre

Smt. Changuna Shiva Thombre

Smt. Asha @ Savita Suresh Khandagale

Shri. Santosh Rama Dhondge

Shri. Kashinath Rama Dhondage

Shri. Narayan Rama Dhondge

Smt. Anjali Haribhau Bhoir

Smt. Jyashree Gopal Langi

Shri. Tanaji Shiva Thombre

Smt. Jayashree Sitaram Khandagle

Respondent(s)

Shri. Waman Devaji Thombre Advocate - Kunte R. M.

Hearing History

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

13-04-2026

Issues

30-03-2026

Issues

10-03-2026

Issues

10-02-2026

Issues

27-01-2026

Issues

Interim Orders

19-12-2017
Order on Exhibit

Case Summary: Prakash Vs. Vishwas (R.C.S. No. 20/2016) Outcome: The defendant's application challenging the court's jurisdiction was rejected. The court held that it has inherent jurisdiction to entertain and try the suit, finding that allegations of fraud and forgery in obtaining the Tenancy Certificate fall outside the exclusive jurisdiction of the Revenue Authority under Section 85 of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Land Act, 1948. The case will proceed on its merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Prakash Vs. Vishwas (R.C.S. No. 20/2016) Outcome: The defendant's application challenging the court's jurisdiction was rejected. The court held that it has inherent jurisdiction to entertain and try the suit, finding that allegations of fraud and forgery in obtaining the Tenancy Certificate fall outside the exclusive jurisdiction of the Revenue Authority under Section 85 of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Land Act, 1948. The case will proceed on its merits. 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