Prashant Sampatrao Gawade vs Dhanaji Rangrao Yadav Advocate - Mahajan Gajanan Annappa — 25/2021

Case under Specific Relief Act Section 37,. Status: Defence Evidence. Next hearing: 10th April 2026.

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHSN090000892021

Defence Evidence

Next Hearing

10th April 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

24/2021

Filing Date

12-01-2021

Registration No

25/2021

Registration Date

16-01-2021

Court

Civil Court Junior Division,Tasgaon

Judge

2-Jt. Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Tasgaon

Acts & Sections

Specific Relief Act Section 37,
CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Section 39

Petitioner(s)

Prashant Sampatrao Gawade

Adv. Adsul Sachin Shamrao

Respondent(s)

Dhanaji Rangrao Yadav Advocate - Mahajan Gajanan Annappa

Hearing History

Judge: 2-Jt. Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Tasgaon

07-03-2026

Defence Evidence

06-02-2026

Evidence

09-01-2026

Hearing

17-11-2025

List of Witness

22-08-2025

List of Witness

Interim Orders

22-02-2023
Order on T.I.

Case Summary Petition Dismissed/Application Rejected The court rejected the plaintiff's application for temporary injunction against the defendant regarding disputed property boundaries and construction issues. The judge found that the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case, lacked balance of convenience in his favor, and would not suffer irreparable loss. Critically, the plaintiff's 7-year silence after an earlier related suit (RCS No. 103/2011) was dismissed in the defendant's favor in 2014 demonstrated negligence and loss of equitable rights, particularly since the plaintiff was aware of the earlier dispute as the original defendant's legal counsel. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary Petition Dismissed/Application Rejected The court rejected the plaintiff's application for temporary injunction against the defendant regarding disputed property boundaries and construction issues. The judge found that the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case, lacked balance of convenience in his favor, and would not suffer irreparable loss. Critically, the plaintiff's 7-year silence after an earlier related suit (RCS No. 103/2011) was dismissed in the defendant's favor in 2014 demonstrated negligence and loss of equitable rights, particularly since the plaintiff was aware of the earlier dispute as the original defendant's legal counsel. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

Civil Court Junior Division,Tasgaon All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case