Jyoti Yempe etc 1 vs Rameshwar Yempe etc 3 Advocate - Kulkarni Upendra N — 283/2018
Case under Hindu Succession Act Section 6. Status: Argument on Exh.____Unready. Next hearing: 11th June 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHSO070003562018
Next Hearing
11th June 2026
Filing Number
374/2018
Filing Date
04-07-2018
Registration No
283/2018
Registration Date
04-07-2018
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Pandhurpur
Judge
6-2nd Jt. CJJD and J.M.F.C. Pandhaprur
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Jyoti Yempe etc 1
Adv. Bhosale Bharat D.
Divya Yempe
Adv. Kadam Dattatraya D
Respondent(s)
Rameshwar Yempe etc 3 Advocate - Kulkarni Upendra N
Padmini Yempe
Chetan alias Bhimashankar Yempe
Someshwar Yempe
Hearing History
Judge: 6-2nd Jt. CJJD and J.M.F.C. Pandhaprur
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 30-04-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
| 13-04-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
| 27-03-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
| 13-03-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
| 18-02-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: RCS 283/2018 (Jyoti Yempe v. Rameshwar Yempe) Outcome: Applications for plaint rejection denied; case adjourned for valuation inquiry. The court rejected defendants' applications to dismiss the plaint under CPC Order VII Rule 11(b) for alleged undervaluation. However, the court found plaintiff's property valuation (Rs. 15,50,000) appeared incorrect based on outdated 2016 Sub-Registrar reports despite filing in 2018, and discovered missing valuations for construction/dwelling houses. The court directed an inquiry under Maharashtra Court Fees Act Section 8 and ordered plaintiff to submit current valuation reports from Sub-Registrar Pandharpur dated 04/07/2018, with submission required at the next hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: RCS 283/2018 (Jyoti Yempe v. Rameshwar Yempe) Outcome: Applications for plaint rejection denied; case adjourned for valuation inquiry. The court rejected defendants' applications to dismiss the plaint under CPC Order VII Rule 11(b) for alleged undervaluation. However, the court found plaintiff's property valuation (Rs. 15,50,000) appeared incorrect based on outdated 2016 Sub-Registrar reports despite filing in 2018, and discovered missing valuations for construction/dwelling houses. The court directed an inquiry under Maharashtra Court Fees Act Section 8 and ordered plaintiff to submit current valuation reports from Sub-Registrar Pandharpur dated 04/07/2018, with submission required at the next hearing. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts