Shri Satish Bhargav More vs Nirmal Group Garmpanchyat VeralJamburde Advocate - None — 500089/2014
Case under Specific Relief Act Section 39. Status: Argument on Exh.____Ready. Next hearing: 20th June 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHRT050007952014
Next Hearing
20th June 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
500126/2014
Filing Date
27-11-2014
Registration No
500089/2014
Registration Date
27-11-2014
Court
Civil Judge, Junior Division, Khed
Judge
2-Joint Civil Judge Jr. Dn J.M.F.C. Khed
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Shri Satish Bhargav More
Adv. Devrukhakar Nitu Laxman
Respondent(s)
Nirmal Group Garmpanchyat VeralJamburde Advocate - None
Sayatam Gruhanirman Sahakari Sanstha Through Sadanand Laxman Bhosale
Adv. Damale Prafulla Anant
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Joint Civil Judge Jr. Dn J.M.F.C. Khed
Argument on Exh.____Ready
Argument on Exh.____Ready
Argument on Exh.____Ready
Argument on Exh.____Ready
Argument on Exh.____Ready
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 29-04-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Ready | |
| 02-04-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Ready | |
| 10-03-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Ready | |
| 13-02-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Ready | |
| 29-01-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Ready |
Interim Orders
Summary: The petition filed under Rule 127 was allowed with conditions. The plaintiff is required to pay Rs. 500 as cost to the defendant, after which the court's previous order dated 07.07.2025 denying cross-examination rights will be set aside, and the witness Diwakar Prabhu will be allowed to be cross-examined by the defendant's counsel. The delay in granting cross-examination was remedied by imposing cost as compensation to the defendant. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The petition filed under Rule 127 was allowed with conditions. The plaintiff is required to pay Rs. 500 as cost to the defendant, after which the court's previous order dated 07.07.2025 denying cross-examination rights will be set aside, and the witness Diwakar Prabhu will be allowed to be cross-examined by the defendant's counsel. The delay in granting cross-examination was remedied by imposing cost as compensation to the defendant. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts