Chaya Kalidas Sutar vs Shakhaadhikari RBL Bank — 614/2024
Case under Indian Contract Act Section 43. Status: Argument on Exh.____Unready. Next hearing: 22nd July 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHSO110016132024
Next Hearing
22nd July 2026
Filing Number
684/2024
Filing Date
30-05-2024
Registration No
614/2024
Registration Date
14-06-2024
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Malshiras
Judge
2-IInd Jt. Civil Judge Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate First Class
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Chaya Kalidas Sutar
Adv. Kachare Dnyandev Mahadev
Respondent(s)
Shakhaadhikari RBL Bank
Samina Ansar Pathan
Hearing History
Judge: 2-IInd Jt. Civil Judge Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate First Class
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 16-04-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
| 10-04-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
| 13-03-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
| 21-02-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
| 17-01-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: 614/2024 Court Order (2nd Joint Civil Judge & JMF Court, Malshiras, Solapur) Date: 06/12/2025 The court granted the petitioner's application to implead RBL Bank (Respondent 1) as a necessary party to the suit. The court found that since the bank disbursed the loan in question to the petitioner on behalf of Respondent 2, and the bank's actions affect the petitioner's rights, it qualifies as an essential party under Civil Procedure Code Rule 10(2). The petitioner was directed to amend the suit within 14 days by reducing the bank's party status and filing the corrected suit petition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: 614/2024 Court Order (2nd Joint Civil Judge & JMF Court, Malshiras, Solapur) Date: 06/12/2025 The court granted the petitioner's application to implead RBL Bank (Respondent 1) as a necessary party to the suit. The court found that since the bank disbursed the loan in question to the petitioner on behalf of Respondent 2, and the bank's actions affect the petitioner's rights, it qualifies as an essential party under Civil Procedure Code Rule 10(2). The petitioner was directed to amend the suit within 14 days by reducing the bank's party status and filing the corrected suit petition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts