Narayan Chandrakant Patap Mainar Gurdian Anita Chandrakant Patap vs State of Maharashtra Advocate - App — 2/2024
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 114Order47. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 27th March 2026.
Civil Revn. - Civil Revision Application
CNR: MHSO050016382024
e-Filing Number
14-10-2024
Filing Number
528/2024
Filing Date
16-10-2024
Registration No
2/2024
Registration Date
28-10-2024
Court
District Court , Pandhurpur
Judge
1-District Judge-1 And Addl Sessions Judge Pandharpur
Decision Date
27th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Narayan Chandrakant Patap Mainar Gurdian Anita Chandrakant Patap
Adv. KOLEKAR RAVIKIRAN SURESH
Vikas Chandrakant Patap Mainar Guardian Anita Chandrakant Patap
Adv. KOLEKAR RAVIKIRAN SURESH
Respondent(s)
State of Maharashtra Advocate - App (Assistant Public Prosecutor)
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Judge-1 And Addl Sessions Judge Pandharpur
Disposed
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 27-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 20-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 13-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 06-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 27-02-2026 | Arguments |
Final Orders / Judgements
The District Judge dismissed the review application filed by Narayan and Vikas Patap, who sought to overturn an earlier order rejecting their property sale application. The court found that while the applicants provided a sale agreement with buyer Shantabai Kalle, they failed to submit documentary evidence of the loan they claimed to repay, which was the stated reason for the sale, making the review application without merit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The District Judge dismissed the review application filed by Narayan and Vikas Patap, who sought to overturn an earlier order rejecting their property sale application. The court found that while the applicants provided a sale agreement with buyer Shantabai Kalle, they failed to submit documentary evidence of the loan they claimed to repay, which was the stated reason for the sale, making the review application without merit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts