Amit Annaso Nikam vs Mohan Bhagwan N ikam Advocate - Shinde Santosh Ramdas — 1579/2020

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 1. Status: Evidence Part Heard. Next hearing: 28th April 2026.

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHSN150081232020

Evidence Part Heard

Next Hearing

28th April 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

3784/2020

Filing Date

15-12-2020

Registration No

1579/2020

Registration Date

15-12-2020

Court

Civil Judge Senior Division Vita

Judge

2-Jt Civil Judge Jr Dn JMFC Vita

Acts & Sections

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Section 1

Petitioner(s)

Amit Annaso Nikam

Adv. Dugam Sanjay Purushottam, Dugam Sanjay Purushottam

Sagar Annaso Nikam

Adv. Jadhav Santoshkumar Narayan

Sarika Bhimrao Ghadge

Adv. Jadhav Santoshkumar Narayan

Shashikala Annaso Nikam

Adv. Jadhav Santoshkumar Narayan

Respondent(s)

Mohan Bhagwan N ikam Advocate - Shinde Santosh Ramdas

Savitri Bhagwan Nikam

Adv. Shinde Santosh Ramdas

Shivaji Aaba Nikam

Adv. Shinde Santosh Ramdas

Hearing History

Judge: 2-Jt Civil Judge Jr Dn JMFC Vita

07-03-2026

Evidence Part Heard

20-01-2026

Evidence Part Heard

07-11-2025

Evidence Part Heard

28-08-2025

Evidence Part Heard

04-07-2025

Evidence Part Heard

Interim Orders

11-07-2023
Copy of Judgment

Summary The court granted an interim injunction order in favor of the plaintiff, restraining Defendant No. 1 from interfering with the plaintiff's equal shared possession and enjoyment of certain properties (Plot Nos. 78, 120, and 124). The court found a prima facie case in the plaintiff's favor regarding their ownership rights to these disputed properties and determined that the balance of convenience favored granting interim relief to prevent irreparable harm to the plaintiff's interests. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court granted an interim injunction order in favor of the plaintiff, restraining Defendant No. 1 from interfering with the plaintiff's equal shared possession and enjoyment of certain properties (Plot Nos. 78, 120, and 124). The court found a prima facie case in the plaintiff's favor regarding their ownership rights to these disputed properties and determined that the balance of convenience favored granting interim relief to prevent irreparable harm to the plaintiff's interests. 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