Machindra Maruti Wagh vs Sitaram Mahadev Dandage Advocate - Satale N. P. — 583/2025

Case under Specific Relief Act Section 34. Status: Argument on Exh.____Unready. Next hearing: 12th June 2026.

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHSO070007082025

Argument on Exh.____Unready

Next Hearing

12th June 2026

e-Filing Number

29-11-2025

Filing Number

780/2025

Filing Date

01-12-2025

Registration No

583/2025

Registration Date

05-12-2025

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Pandhurpur

Judge

1-JT. CIVIL JUDGE J.D. PANDHARPUR

Acts & Sections

Specific Relief Act Section 34

Petitioner(s)

Machindra Maruti Wagh

Adv. DESHMUKH DATTA SHIVAJI

Gorakh Maruti Wagh

Adv. DESHMUKH DATTA SHIVAJI

Sambhaji Maruti Wagh

Adv. DESHMUKH DATTA SHIVAJI

Tulshiram Maruti Wagh

Adv. DESHMUKH DATTA SHIVAJI

Rajvanta Balu More

Adv. DESHMUKH DATTA SHIVAJI

Vijaya Ambadas Achakal

Adv. DESHMUKH DATTA SHIVAJI

Respondent(s)

Sitaram Mahadev Dandage Advocate - Satale N. P.

Sagar Mahadev Dandage

Mangal Mahadev Dandage

Hari Shankar Wagh

Ganpat Shankar Wagh

Bhaskar Shankar Wagh

Laxmi Nagnath More

Avinda Dinkar Bombale

Sindhu Narayan More

Bhajandas Maruti Wagh

Hearing History

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

04-05-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

13-04-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

03-04-2026

Order on Exh

13-03-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

23-02-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

Interim Orders

13-04-2026
Order on Exhibit

Case Summary: R.C.S. No. 583/2025 The court rejected the defendants' application to dismiss the plaintiffs' suit for declaration and injunction regarding disputed property. The defendants argued the suit lacked cause of action and that necessary parties were omitted, but the court found these grounds insufficient under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code. The court held that the plaint clearly disclosed the cause of action—obstruction by defendants to plaintiffs' possession—and that questions regarding plaintiffs' legal rights and necessary parties require merit-based adjudication, not summary dismissal. No costs awarded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: R.C.S. No. 583/2025 The court rejected the defendants' application to dismiss the plaintiffs' suit for declaration and injunction regarding disputed property. The defendants argued the suit lacked cause of action and that necessary parties were omitted, but the court found these grounds insufficient under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code. The court held that the plaint clearly disclosed the cause of action—obstruction by defendants to plaintiffs' possession—and that questions regarding plaintiffs' legal rights and necessary parties require merit-based adjudication, not summary dismissal. No costs awarded. 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