Parmeshwar Chavan vs Jintendra Jabade Advocate - Savji A. R. — 293/2019
Case under Specific Relief Act Section 38. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 24th June 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHSO070003572019
Next Hearing
24th June 2026
Filing Number
400/2019
Filing Date
06-07-2019
Registration No
293/2019
Registration Date
06-07-2019
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Pandhurpur
Judge
1-JT. CIVIL JUDGE J.D. PANDHARPUR
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Parmeshwar Chavan
Adv. Jadhav V.K.
Respondent(s)
Jintendra Jabade Advocate - Savji A. R.
Hearing History
Judge: 1-JT. CIVIL JUDGE J.D. PANDHARPUR
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Hearing
Hearing
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 15-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 13-03-2026 | Evidence |
| 04-02-2026 | Evidence |
| 12-01-2026 | Hearing |
| 01-12-2025 | Hearing |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: RCS No. 293/2019 Parmeshwar Chavan sought an interim injunction to restrain defendant Jintendra Jabade from disturbing his possession of agricultural property (3 R of land) in Solapur District, allegedly purchased via sale deed dated 07.03.2014 for Rs. 1,80,000. The defendant claimed the transaction was actually a money-lending arrangement where he borrowed Rs. 75,000 as security against the property, repaid the amount, but the plaintiff refused to cancel the deed. The court rejected the injunction application, finding the plaintiff failed to establish settled continuous possession since 2014 and lacked prima facie case, as revenue records only showed possession from 2019 onwards. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: RCS No. 293/2019 Parmeshwar Chavan sought an interim injunction to restrain defendant Jintendra Jabade from disturbing his possession of agricultural property (3 R of land) in Solapur District, allegedly purchased via sale deed dated 07.03.2014 for Rs. 1,80,000. The defendant claimed the transaction was actually a money-lending arrangement where he borrowed Rs. 75,000 as security against the property, repaid the amount, but the plaintiff refused to cancel the deed. The court rejected the injunction application, finding the plaintiff failed to establish settled continuous possession since 2014 and lacked prima facie case, as revenue records only showed possession from 2019 onwards. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts