Mangesh Mane Deshmukh vs Gram Panchayat Chaundeshwarwadi Tarfe Sarpanch — 10/2026

Case under Specific Relief Act Section 34. Status: Order on Exh. Next hearing: 10th June 2026.

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHSO110000302026

Order on Exh

Next Hearing

10th June 2026

e-Filing Number

05-01-2026

Filing Number

6/2026

Filing Date

05-01-2026

Registration No

10/2026

Registration Date

05-01-2026

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Malshiras

Judge

2-IInd Jt. Civil Judge Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate First Class

Acts & Sections

Specific Relief Act Section 34

Petitioner(s)

Mangesh Mane Deshmukh

Adv. PORE BHOJRAJ CHANDRAKANT

Respondent(s)

Gram Panchayat Chaundeshwarwadi Tarfe Sarpanch

Hearing History

Judge: 2-IInd Jt. Civil Judge Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate First Class

10-04-2026

Order on Exh

16-03-2026

Order on Exh

13-03-2026

Order on Exh

12-03-2026

Order on Exh

27-02-2026

Order on Exh

Interim Orders

13-03-2026
Order on Exhibit

Case Summary: Mangesh Mane Deshmukh v. Gram Panchayat Chaundeshwarwadi Petition Dismissed (Appeal Denied) The court rejected the petitioner's plea to halt an e-tender for concrete road construction awarded to a third-party contractor. The petitioner, a registered government contractor who submitted a 9.9% lower bid, claimed procedural violations in technical evaluation. The court found that the tender constitutes only an "invitation to offer" and no binding contract existed between the petitioner and panchayat prior to acceptance. The court ruled the panchayat had authority to accept the third party's bid. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Mangesh Mane Deshmukh v. Gram Panchayat Chaundeshwarwadi Petition Dismissed (Appeal Denied) The court rejected the petitioner's plea to halt an e-tender for concrete road construction awarded to a third-party contractor. The petitioner, a registered government contractor who submitted a 9.9% lower bid, claimed procedural violations in technical evaluation. The court found that the tender constitutes only an "invitation to offer" and no binding contract existed between the petitioner and panchayat prior to acceptance. The court ruled the panchayat had authority to accept the third party's bid. 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 , Malshiras All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case