Perped @ Parmed Philis Pinto vs Shriram Vikram Kubal Deceased etc.7 Advocate - PARULEKAR RUPESH KESHAV1. — 700025/2009
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section O7,R3. Status: Evidence Part Heard. Next hearing: 30th June 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHSI070000622009
Next Hearing
30th June 2026
Filing Number
700025/2009
Filing Date
10-02-2009
Registration No
700025/2009
Registration Date
10-02-2009
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Malvan
Judge
1-Civil Judge J.D. J.M.F.C. Malvan
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Perped @ Parmed Philis Pinto
Adv. GAVANKAR SAMEER SURESH
Respondent(s)
Shriram Vikram Kubal Deceased etc.7 Advocate - PARULEKAR RUPESH KESHAV1.
Janaki Shriram Kubal
Adv. PARULEKAR RUPESH KESHAV
Dipak Shriram Kubal
Adv. GOVEKAR HEMENDRA LAXMAN
Vikram Shriram Kubal
Adv. PARULEKAR RUPESH KESHAV
Mohan Shriram Kubal
Adv. GOVEKAR HEMENDRA LAXMAN
Suhasini Ghanshyam Rawool
Adv. exparty
Govind Tukaram Koyande
Adv. abated
Ratnmala Tukaram Koyande
Adv. inperson
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Civil Judge J.D. J.M.F.C. Malvan
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 07-05-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 30-04-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 04-04-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 11-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 31-01-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
Interim Orders
SUMMARY: The application filed by the plaintiff to strike out the names of deceased defendants no.6 and 7 from the suit is allowed. The court found that these defendants were improperly joined as they are neither necessary nor proper parties, no relief is claimed against them, and their presence is not required for adjudication. The plaintiff is directed to carry out necessary amendments to the plaint and provide an amended copy to the defendants at no cost before the next date. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
SUMMARY: The application filed by the plaintiff to strike out the names of deceased defendants no.6 and 7 from the suit is allowed. The court found that these defendants were improperly joined as they are neither necessary nor proper parties, no relief is claimed against them, and their presence is not required for adjudication. The plaintiff is directed to carry out necessary amendments to the plaint and provide an amended copy to the defendants at no cost before the next date. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts