Sonyabapu Baban alias Tukaram Salgar vs Brijgopal Bhagwandas Tapadiya Advocate - Deshpande Sushil Sudhir — 115/2025

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section O.43R.1. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 30th April 2026.

M.C.A. - Misc.Civil Appeal

CNR: MHSO010034582025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

11-11-2025

Filing Number

1278/2025

Filing Date

14-11-2025

Registration No

115/2025

Registration Date

17-11-2025

Court

District and Session Court , Solapur

Judge

4-District Judge - 2 and Additional Session Judge

Decision Date

30th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Acts & Sections

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE Section O.43R.1

Petitioner(s)

Sonyabapu Baban alias Tukaram Salgar

Adv. Kulkarni Santosh Balwant

Padmini Baban alias Tukaram Salgar

Adv. Kulkarni Santosh Balwant

Suvarna Ramdas Deshmukh

Adv. Kulkarni Santosh Balwant

Savita Gorakh Kale

Adv. Kulkarni Santosh Balwant

Kavita Raosaheb Kale

Adv. Kulkarni Santosh Balwant

Sunita Rajendra Shirame

Adv. Kulkarni Santosh Balwant

Respondent(s)

Brijgopal Bhagwandas Tapadiya Advocate - Deshpande Sushil Sudhir

Hearing History

Judge: 4-District Judge - 2 and Additional Session Judge

30-04-2026

Disposed

28-04-2026

Arguments

17-04-2026

Arguments

07-04-2026

Arguments

02-04-2026

Arguments

Final Orders / Judgements

30-04-2026
Copy of Judgment

Case Summary: MCA 115/2025 Court Decision: The District Judge dismissed the plaintiffs' appeal and upheld the trial court's rejection of their temporary injunction application. The court found the plaintiffs failed to establish a prima facie case or balance of convenience for injunctive relief. Key Reasoning: The dispute involves adjacent agricultural fields in Solapur. The defendant changed his property's gat number from 146/2 to 146/1 through an authorized mutation entry and subsequently obtained an official measurement. The court held that merely changing a gat number (property identification) by competent revenue authority and conducting an official measurement does not constitute illegal obstruction of the plaintiffs' possession. The plaintiffs produced no material evidence demonstrating the defendant was actually interfering with their possession or illegally attempting to grab their land, making their claim of irreparable loss unsubstantiated. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: MCA 115/2025 Court Decision: The District Judge dismissed the plaintiffs' appeal and upheld the trial court's rejection of their temporary injunction application. The court found the plaintiffs failed to establish a prima facie case or balance of convenience for injunctive relief. Key Reasoning: The dispute involves adjacent agricultural fields in Solapur. The defendant changed his property's gat number from 146/2 to 146/1 through an authorized mutation entry and subsequently obtained an official measurement. The court held that merely changing a gat number (property identification) by competent revenue authority and conducting an official measurement does not constitute illegal obstruction of the plaintiffs' possession. The plaintiffs produced no material evidence demonstrating the defendant was actually interfering with their possession or illegally attempting to grab their land, making their claim of irreparable loss unsubstantiated. 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

District and Session Court , Solapur All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case