Madhukar Maruti Jagtap vs Hon. Collector, Solapur — 15/2025

Case under Specific Relief Act Section 3439. Status: Argument on Exh.____Unready. Next hearing: 19th June 2026.

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHSO060001922025

Argument on Exh.____Unready

Next Hearing

19th June 2026

e-Filing Number

10-02-2025

Filing Number

195/2025

Filing Date

10-02-2025

Registration No

15/2025

Registration Date

10-02-2025

Court

Civil Court Senior Division , Pandhurpur

Judge

3-2nd Jt. Civil Judge Senior Division, Pandharpur.

Acts & Sections

Specific Relief Act Section 3439

Petitioner(s)

Madhukar Maruti Jagtap

Adv. Sujata Ravindra Kshirsagar

Respondent(s)

Hon. Collector, Solapur

Upvibhagiy Adhikari Mangalvedha

Tehsildar Mangalwedha

Mukhyadhikari Nagarparishad Mangalwedha

Pushpanjali Nandkumar Shinde

Hearing History

Judge: 3-2nd Jt. Civil Judge Senior Division, Pandharpur.

24-04-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

03-04-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

13-03-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

06-03-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

13-02-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

Interim Orders

18-07-2025
Order on Exhibit

Case Summary: R.C.S. No. 15/2025 Outcome: Application rejected. Dattatraya Nana Mali sought to be added as a defendant to the suit filed by Madhukar Jagtap against the State of Maharashtra and others. The applicant claimed his adjacent property (Gat No. 2365/2) would suffer irreparable loss from any court order regarding the suit property (Survey No. 963). The court rejected the application, finding the applicant failed to demonstrate any legal right in the suit property or establish he was a necessary party. The suit concerned only the plaintiff's ownership and possession of Gat No. 2368 and a challenge to an encroachment notice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: R.C.S. No. 15/2025 Outcome: Application rejected. Dattatraya Nana Mali sought to be added as a defendant to the suit filed by Madhukar Jagtap against the State of Maharashtra and others. The applicant claimed his adjacent property (Gat No. 2365/2) would suffer irreparable loss from any court order regarding the suit property (Survey No. 963). The court rejected the application, finding the applicant failed to demonstrate any legal right in the suit property or establish he was a necessary party. The suit concerned only the plaintiff's ownership and possession of Gat No. 2368 and a challenge to an encroachment notice. 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 Court Senior Division , Pandhurpur All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case