Shri. Ashok Maruti Jadhav vs Shri. Tanaji Namdeo Jadhav Advocate - Medsinge Nandkumar Pandurang — 45/2016

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 1. Status: Evidence Part Heard. Next hearing: 13th April 2026.

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHSN090002202016

Evidence Part Heard

Next Hearing

13th April 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

76/2016

Filing Date

11-03-2016

Registration No

45/2016

Registration Date

16-03-2016

Court

Civil Court Junior Division,Tasgaon

Judge

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

Acts & Sections

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Section 1

Petitioner(s)

Shri. Ashok Maruti Jadhav

Adv. Shinde Vikramsinh Balasaheb

Smt. Bhagirathi Maruti Jadhav

Adv. Shinde Vikramsinh Balasaheb

Respondent(s)

Shri. Tanaji Namdeo Jadhav Advocate - Medsinge Nandkumar Pandurang

Shri. Dhananjay Namdeo Jadhav

Smt. Shakuntala Ramrao Mane

Smt. Kamal Ashok Mohite

Smt. Vimal Vishnupant Hirugade

Sou. Kumodini Rajaram Shinde

Smt. Laxmi Vilas Jadhav

Shri. Vinayak Vilas Jadhav

Smt. Aasha Aanandrao Jadhav

Shri. Sandip Anandrao Jadhav

Shri. Dhiraj Anandrao Jadhav

Hearing History

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

07-03-2026

Evidence Part Heard

21-02-2026

Evidence Part Heard

17-01-2026

Evidence Part Heard

06-12-2025

Evidence Part Heard

15-11-2025

Evidence Part Heard

Interim Orders

04-03-2017
Order on Exhibit

Summary: The application is allowed. Defendants No.1 and 4 to 10 are permitted to file their written statement, which was initially submitted beyond the prescribed time limit, subject to payment of costs of Rs.400/- to the plaintiffs as a condition precedent. The court found the reasons for the delay to be proper and justified in the interest of justice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The application is allowed. Defendants No.1 and 4 to 10 are permitted to file their written statement, which was initially submitted beyond the prescribed time limit, subject to payment of costs of Rs.400/- to the plaintiffs as a condition precedent. The court found the reasons for the delay to be proper and justified in the interest of justice. 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,Tasgaon All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case