Tukaram Ganpat Bait etc.2 vs Vandana Ganpat Bait Nee Archana Chandrakant Patade Advocate - Chavan Punam Chandrashekhar — 17/2025
Case under Specific Relief Act Section 38,39. Status: Argument on Exh.____Unready. Next hearing: 05th May 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHRT080001202025
Next Hearing
05th May 2026
e-Filing Number
18-03-2025
Filing Number
28/2025
Filing Date
19-03-2025
Registration No
17/2025
Registration Date
19-03-2025
Court
Civil Judge Junior Division , Deorukh
Judge
1-Civil Judge J.D. J.M.F.C. Deorukh
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Tukaram Ganpat Bait etc.2
Adv. Limbukar Chandrashekhar Vijay
Mohan Ganpat Bait
Adv. Rajesh Kashiram Shinde
Respondent(s)
Vandana Ganpat Bait Nee Archana Chandrakant Patade Advocate - Chavan Punam Chandrashekhar
Ramchandra Ganpat Bait.
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Civil Judge J.D. J.M.F.C. Deorukh
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Awaiting Summons
Awaiting Summons
Awaiting Summons
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 28-04-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready | |
| 07-04-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready | |
| 10-03-2026 | Awaiting Summons | |
| 24-02-2026 | Awaiting Summons | |
| 15-01-2026 | Awaiting Summons |
Interim Orders
Summary: The court partially granted the petitioner's plea (ावा निळकत - temple property dispute). The court ordered the respondent to remove the lock she placed on the temple room's door, either by keeping the key outside the door or by removing the lock entirely and reinstalling it on the door. The court also restrained the respondent from preventing the petitioner from performing prayers, conducting Ganesh festivals, and other religious activities in the disputed temple room, pending final judgment in the case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The court partially granted the petitioner's plea (ावा निळकत - temple property dispute). The court ordered the respondent to remove the lock she placed on the temple room's door, either by keeping the key outside the door or by removing the lock entirely and reinstalling it on the door. The court also restrained the respondent from preventing the petitioner from performing prayers, conducting Ganesh festivals, and other religious activities in the disputed temple room, pending final judgment in the case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts