Mumtaj Ajij Inamdar vs Aapaso Babu Kalawant Advocate - Mane Nitin Krishnaji, Mane Nitin Krishnaji — 302/2023

Case under Specific Relief Act Section 32,39,. Status: Argument on Exh.____Unready. Next hearing: 24th April 2026.

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHSN060025302023

Argument on Exh.____Unready

Next Hearing

24th April 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

597/2023

Filing Date

12-10-2023

Registration No

302/2023

Registration Date

20-10-2023

Court

Civil Court Junior Division,Miraj

Judge

2-JT. CIVIL JUDGE JR. DN. MIRAJ, J.M.F.C. MIRAJ

Acts & Sections

Specific Relief Act Section 32,39,

Petitioner(s)

Mumtaj Ajij Inamdar

Adv. Mushrif Serab Abdulmunaf, Mushrif Serab Abdulmunaf, Mushrif Serab Abdulmunaf

Niyaj Ajij Inamdar

Aafrin Ajij Inamdar

Respondent(s)

Aapaso Babu Kalawant Advocate - Mane Nitin Krishnaji, Mane Nitin Krishnaji

Noor Mohammad Bapuso Kalavant

Mahiraj Bapuso Kalavant

Jannat Bapuso Kalavant

Hearing History

Judge: 2-JT. CIVIL JUDGE JR. DN. MIRAJ, J.M.F.C. MIRAJ

02-04-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

07-03-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

04-03-2026

Order on Exh

02-03-2026

Order on Exh

25-02-2026

Order on Exh

Interim Orders

07-03-2026
Order on Exhibit

The plaintiffs' application for an injunction restraining the defendants from constructing a toilet on the disputed property has been rejected. The court found no prima facie case, no balance of convenience favoring the plaintiffs, and no irreparable loss, noting that restraining the defendants would deprive them of essential facilities during the ongoing partition suit. Costs are imposed in the main cause. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The plaintiffs' application for an injunction restraining the defendants from constructing a toilet on the disputed property has been rejected. The court found no prima facie case, no balance of convenience favoring the plaintiffs, and no irreparable loss, noting that restraining the defendants would deprive them of essential facilities during the ongoing partition suit. Costs are imposed in the main cause. 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 Court Junior Division,Miraj All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case