Sambhaji Bapu Patil vs Bhau Bapu Patil — 104/2025

Case under Hindu Succession Act Section 6and22. Status: Steps. Next hearing: 10th April 2026.

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHSN140005502025

Steps

Next Hearing

10th April 2026

e-Filing Number

22-07-2025

Filing Number

154/2025

Filing Date

24-07-2025

Registration No

104/2025

Registration Date

25-07-2025

Court

Civil Court Junior Division,Shirala

Judge

1-C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. SHIRALA

Acts & Sections

Hindu Succession Act Section 6and22
Specific Relief Act Section 34and38

Petitioner(s)

Sambhaji Bapu Patil

Adv. Surle Patil Hemant Sadashiv

Laxman Bapu Patil

Adv. Hemant Surale

Respondent(s)

Bhau Bapu Patil

Anna Bapu Patil

Sushila Balwant Patil

Mahesh Balwant Patil

Chetan Balwant Patil

Archana Santosh Patil

Yesabai Ganpati Kadam

Shivaji Vilas Jadhav

Anna Vilas Jadhav

Jayashri Narayan Patil

Bharati Chandrakant Patil

Hearing History

Judge: 1-C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. SHIRALA

24-03-2026

Steps

13-03-2026

Order on Exh

07-03-2026

Order on Exh

16-02-2026

Order on Exh

29-01-2026

Order on Exh

Interim Orders

24-03-2026
Order on T.I.

Summary: The plaintiff's petition for interim relief (injunction) was dismissed. The court found that the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case, as the disputed agricultural properties (plots 670 and 671) were jointly owned by both parties and no proper division had occurred, making the plaintiff ineligible for the requested interim order. Additionally, the cost of the petition was directed to be included in the main case expenses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The plaintiff's petition for interim relief (injunction) was dismissed. The court found that the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case, as the disputed agricultural properties (plots 670 and 671) were jointly owned by both parties and no proper division had occurred, making the plaintiff ineligible for the requested interim order. Additionally, the cost of the petition was directed to be included in the main case expenses. 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,Shirala All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case