Sumitra Prakash Patil vs Mangal Uttam Bhadule Advocate - Karajgar Shreekant Dhondiram — 231/2024
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 96O41. Status: Argument on Exh.____Ready. Next hearing: 20th June 2026.
R.C.A. - Regular Civil Appeal
CNR: MHSN170013312020
Next Hearing
20th June 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
231/2024
Filing Date
05-02-2024
Registration No
231/2024
Registration Date
05-02-2024
Court
District and Additional Sessions Court, Vita
Judge
1-District Judge 1 and Additional Sessions Judge
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Sumitra Prakash Patil
Adv. Kore Santosh Vitthal
Respondent(s)
Mangal Uttam Bhadule Advocate - Karajgar Shreekant Dhondiram
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Judge 1 and Additional Sessions Judge
Argument on Exh.____Ready
Argument on Exh.____Ready
Argument on Exh.____Ready
Argument on Exh.____Ready
Argument on Exh.____Ready
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 04-04-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Ready | |
| 07-03-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Ready | |
| 03-01-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Ready | |
| 01-11-2025 | Argument on Exh.____Ready | |
| 20-09-2025 | Argument on Exh.____Ready |
Interim Orders
Summary: Application Exh.45 filed by the respondent to set aside a "no say" order was allowed. The respondent is permitted to file a reply to Application Exh.35, which sought to make a third person (tenant) a party to the property dispute proceedings. The court allowed the application without prejudice to any party. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: Application Exh.45 filed by the respondent to set aside a "no say" order was allowed. The respondent is permitted to file a reply to Application Exh.35, which sought to make a third person (tenant) a party to the property dispute proceedings. The court allowed the application without prejudice to any party. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts