Sanjay Sandipan Gaikwad vs Sandipan Shankar Gaikwa Advocate - Sawant Vijay Bhaskar — 1300032/2017
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section partition. Status: Filing of Say on Exh___Ready. Next hearing: 22nd April 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHSN110001392017
Next Hearing
22nd April 2026
Filing Number
40/2017
Filing Date
28-02-2017
Registration No
1300032/2017
Registration Date
01-03-2017
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Atpadi
Judge
2-Jt. Civil Judge Jr. Dn. and J.M.F.C., Atpadi
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Sanjay Sandipan Gaikwad
Adv. Nichal Nilkhant Namdev
Respondent(s)
Sandipan Shankar Gaikwa Advocate - Sawant Vijay Bhaskar
Sou. Indabai Sandipan Gaikwad
Raosaheb Sandipan Gaikwad
Tanaji Sandipan Gaikwad
Sou. Latika Baban Daund
Vikas Dadaso Chavan
Ankush Dadaso Chavan
Dadaso Bhimrao Chavan
Atmaram Shankar Gaikwad
Daulatrao Bhimrao Gaikwad
Rajram Dnyanu Gaikwad
Dhondiram Dnyanu Gaikwad
Dharmadas Govind Gaikwad
Sou. Vimal Raosaheb Gaikwad
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Jt. Civil Judge Jr. Dn. and J.M.F.C., Atpadi
Filing of Say on Exh___Ready
Filing of Say on Exh___Ready
Filing of Say on Exh___Ready
Filing of Say on Exh___Ready
Filing of Say on Exh___Ready
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 02-04-2026 | Filing of Say on Exh___Ready |
| 07-03-2026 | Filing of Say on Exh___Ready |
| 26-02-2026 | Filing of Say on Exh___Ready |
| 04-02-2026 | Filing of Say on Exh___Ready |
| 07-01-2026 | Filing of Say on Exh___Ready |
Interim Orders
Case Summary R.C.S. No. 32/2017 — The plaintiff's application for status-quo to prevent defendant no. 1 from mortgaging suit properties has been rejected. The court found insufficient documentary evidence that defendant no. 1 approached any bank for a loan, and noted the 30-day response period had not yet expired. Defendant no. 1 is directed to file his written statement as early as possible, with the plaintiff retaining opportunity to present evidence during further proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary R.C.S. No. 32/2017 — The plaintiff's application for status-quo to prevent defendant no. 1 from mortgaging suit properties has been rejected. The court found insufficient documentary evidence that defendant no. 1 approached any bank for a loan, and noted the 30-day response period had not yet expired. Defendant no. 1 is directed to file his written statement as early as possible, with the plaintiff retaining opportunity to present evidence during further proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts