Budhiman Sadashiv Thite vs Vivekanand Sahadhiv Thite Advocate - Nayaku Dnyaneshwar Nana — 547/2025

Case under Specific Relief Act Section 34. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 22nd June 2026.

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHSO070006652025

Evidence

Next Hearing

22nd June 2026

e-Filing Number

06-11-2025

Filing Number

734/2025

Filing Date

06-11-2025

Registration No

547/2025

Registration Date

13-11-2025

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Pandhurpur

Judge

1-JT. CIVIL JUDGE J.D. PANDHARPUR

Acts & Sections

Specific Relief Act Section 34

Petitioner(s)

Budhiman Sadashiv Thite

Adv. DESHMUKH DATTA SHIVAJI

Pallavi Budhiman Thite

Adv. DESHMUKH DATTA SHIVAJI

Harshavardhan Budhiman Thite

Adv. DESHMUKH DATTA SHIVAJI

Respondent(s)

Vivekanand Sahadhiv Thite Advocate - Nayaku Dnyaneshwar Nana

Rukmini Sadashiv Thite

Hearing History

Judge: 1-JT. CIVIL JUDGE J.D. PANDHARPUR

02-05-2026

Evidence

01-04-2026

Evidence

13-03-2026

Order on Exh

09-03-2026

Order on Exh

27-02-2026

Order on Exh

Interim Orders

01-04-2026
Order on T.I.

Summary of R.C.S. No. 547/2025 The court granted a temporary injunction in favor of the plaintiffs. The defendants (the brother and mother of plaintiff No. 1) are restrained from obstructing the plaintiffs' possession of agricultural property (Gat No. 740/A) in village Bhose, Solapur, or preventing them from cultivating and harvesting sugarcane crops until final disposal of the suit. The court found the plaintiffs had established prima-facie possession through valid sale-deed, 7/12 extracts, and evidence of ongoing cultivation, while defendants failed to prove joint possession. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of R.C.S. No. 547/2025 The court granted a temporary injunction in favor of the plaintiffs. The defendants (the brother and mother of plaintiff No. 1) are restrained from obstructing the plaintiffs' possession of agricultural property (Gat No. 740/A) in village Bhose, Solapur, or preventing them from cultivating and harvesting sugarcane crops until final disposal of the suit. The court found the plaintiffs had established prima-facie possession through valid sale-deed, 7/12 extracts, and evidence of ongoing cultivation, while defendants failed to prove joint possession. 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 Junior Division , Pandhurpur All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case