Prakash Dnyandeo Patil and 1 vs Jagannath Limbaji Mali and — 40/2019
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section Order21,Rule11. Status: Filing of Say on Exh___Unready. Next hearing: 13th April 2026.
Reg Dkst - Regular Execution Petition
CNR: MHSN070007292019
Next Hearing
13th April 2026
Filing Number
185/2019
Filing Date
21-08-2019
Registration No
40/2019
Registration Date
23-08-2019
Court
Civil Court Junior Division,kmahankal
Judge
3-Jt.C.J.J.D J.M.F.C. KAVATHEMAHANKAL
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Prakash Dnyandeo Patil and 1
Adv. Kadam Vitthal Sarjerao
Vikas Dnyandeo Patil
Adv. Kadam Vitthal Sarjerao
Respondent(s)
Jagannath Limbaji Mali and
Anandrao Mahadeo Patil
Tukaram Dada Patil Deceased(Legal Heir) 3.
Subhadra Tukaram Patil
Dnynu Dada Patil
Nivrutti Dada Patil
Narayan alias Baburao Sopan Patil
Dinkar Sopan Patil Deceased(Legal Heir)
Ramchandra Ankush Patil
Balu Martanda Wale
Shivling Balaso Wale
Kusum Dinkar Patil
Ashwini Anandrao Patil
Hearing History
Judge: 3-Jt.C.J.J.D J.M.F.C. KAVATHEMAHANKAL
Filing of Say on Exh___Unready
Steps_Unready
Notice_Unready
Order on Exh
Argument on Exh.____Unready
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 16-03-2026 | Filing of Say on Exh___Unready |
| 07-03-2026 | Steps_Unready |
| 13-01-2026 | Notice_Unready |
| 15-12-2025 | Order on Exh |
| 17-11-2025 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
Interim Orders
Case Summary The Court allowed the Decree Holder's application for delivery of possession of encroached land. A warrant was issued to deliver possession of 07 Are and 03 Are of encroached land (clearly identified in the decree map) through the TILR and court bailiff, rejecting the Judgment Debtor's objections that the decree was vague and required evidence recording. The decree from Civil Suit No. 46/2009 had attained finality after appellate confirmation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary The Court allowed the Decree Holder's application for delivery of possession of encroached land. A warrant was issued to deliver possession of 07 Are and 03 Are of encroached land (clearly identified in the decree map) through the TILR and court bailiff, rejecting the Judgment Debtor's objections that the decree was vague and required evidence recording. The decree from Civil Suit No. 46/2009 had attained finality after appellate confirmation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts