Vijaya Sarjerao Patil vs Amar Kiran Velapure Advocate - Deokar Saurabh Anna — 311/2023

Case under Specific Relief Act Section 39,. Status: Evidence Part Heard. Next hearing: 13th April 2026.

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHSN150015542023

Evidence Part Heard

Next Hearing

13th April 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

1329/2023

Filing Date

16-10-2023

Registration No

311/2023

Registration Date

17-10-2023

Court

Civil Judge Senior Division Vita

Judge

2-Jt Civil Judge Jr Dn JMFC Vita

Acts & Sections

Specific Relief Act Section 39,

Petitioner(s)

Vijaya Sarjerao Patil

Adv. Mahadik Bapusaheb Mahadeo

Respondent(s)

Amar Kiran Velapure Advocate - Deokar Saurabh Anna

Hearing History

Judge: 2-Jt Civil Judge Jr Dn JMFC Vita

10-03-2026

Evidence Part Heard

07-03-2026

Order on Exh

26-02-2026

Order on Exh

02-02-2026

Order on Exh

29-01-2026

Argument on Exh.____Ready

Interim Orders

10-03-2026
Order on T.I.

Court Order Summary Case: R.Di.Mu. No. 311/2023 (Vijaya Patil v. Amar Velapure) Court: Joint Civil Judge Jr. Division & JMFC, Khanapur, Sangli District Date: 10.03.2026 Outcome: The defendant's interim relief (temporary injunction) petition seeking to restrain the plaintiff from unauthorized construction on jointly-held property was dismissed. The court found that the plaintiff had obtained an earlier interim order (dated 04.04.2024) restraining the defendant from construction, and the defendant had complied. However, the plaintiff subsequently resumed construction in violation of equity principles. The court rejected the defendant's application, citing "unclean hands" doctrine, and costs were imposed on the defendant. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Order Summary Case: R.Di.Mu. No. 311/2023 (Vijaya Patil v. Amar Velapure) Court: Joint Civil Judge Jr. Division & JMFC, Khanapur, Sangli District Date: 10.03.2026 Outcome: The defendant's interim relief (temporary injunction) petition seeking to restrain the plaintiff from unauthorized construction on jointly-held property was dismissed. The court found that the plaintiff had obtained an earlier interim order (dated 04.04.2024) restraining the defendant from construction, and the defendant had complied. However, the plaintiff subsequently resumed construction in violation of equity principles. The court rejected the defendant's application, citing "unclean hands" doctrine, and costs were imposed on the defendant. 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 Judge Senior Division Vita All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case