Shri Parshwanath Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit Vita Through Clerk Makarand Ganpatrao Madane vs Arvind Janardhan Sutar Advocate - Shitole Sourabh Balkrishna — 18/2023
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 1908. Status: Depositing Amount. Next hearing: 16th June 2026.
Reg Dkst - Regular Execution Petition
CNR: MHSN150008542023
Next Hearing
16th June 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
598/2023
Filing Date
31-03-2023
Registration No
18/2023
Registration Date
04-04-2023
Court
Civil Judge Senior Division Vita
Judge
3-2nd Jt Civil Judge Jr Dn JMFC Vita
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Shri Parshwanath Nagari Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit Vita Through Clerk Makarand Ganpatrao Madane
Adv. Hingase Dilip Vasantrao
Respondent(s)
Arvind Janardhan Sutar Advocate - Shitole Sourabh Balkrishna
Deeoaj Prakash Shaha
Rohit Shrikrishna Bandhekar
Hearing History
Judge: 3-2nd Jt Civil Judge Jr Dn JMFC Vita
Depositing Amount
Depositing Amount
Depositing Amount
Ex-Parte Order
For Referal to the Special Mediation Drive Mediation For the Nation _Unready
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 07-03-2026 | Depositing Amount | |
| 21-01-2026 | Depositing Amount | |
| 12-11-2025 | Depositing Amount | |
| 18-09-2025 | Ex-Parte Order | |
| 20-08-2025 | For Referal to the Special Mediation Drive Mediation For the Nation _Unready |
Interim Orders
Summary: The application filed by Judgment Debtor (J.D.) no.1 to set aside a 'No Say' order was allowed. The court accepted the J.D.'s explanation that driving work prevented timely communication with his advocate for filing the response. However, the court imposed costs of Rs. 300 on the J.D. to be paid to the decreeholder as penalty for the delay caused in the execution proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The application filed by Judgment Debtor (J.D.) no.1 to set aside a 'No Say' order was allowed. The court accepted the J.D.'s explanation that driving work prevented timely communication with his advocate for filing the response. However, the court imposed costs of Rs. 300 on the J.D. to be paid to the decreeholder as penalty for the delay caused in the execution 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