Rajabhau Sutar. etc.1. vs Sou. Kalinda Sutar. etc.8. Advocate - Kshirsagar S.J. — 1301642/2014
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section ---. Status: Argument on Exh.____Unready. Next hearing: 15th June 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHSO130024842014
Next Hearing
15th June 2026
Filing Number
1301857/2014
Filing Date
11-12-2014
Registration No
1301642/2014
Registration Date
15-12-2014
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Barshi
Judge
5-4th Jt. Civil Judge, J.D. and JMFC Barshi
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Rajabhau Sutar. etc.1.
Adv. Thokade Vilas Digambr
Ganesh Sutar.
Respondent(s)
Sou. Kalinda Sutar. etc.8. Advocate - Kshirsagar S.J.
Tulshidas Sutar.
Rohidas Sutar.
Sou. Suman Sutar.
Sou. Meerabai Sutar.
Sou. Manisha Sutar.
Sou. Vandana Panchal.
Shivaji Borade.
Dilip Borade.
Hearing History
Judge: 5-4th Jt. Civil Judge, J.D. and JMFC Barshi
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Dismissal Order
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 29-04-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
| 13-03-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
| 27-02-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
| 02-02-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
| 13-01-2026 | Dismissal Order |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: RCS 1301642/2014 Outcome: Temporary injunction GRANTED. Defendant No.1 is restrained from alienating the suit agricultural property or creating any third-party interest until final disposal of the case. Key Facts: Plaintiffs challenged a 1997 sale deed for 72 acres of undivided inherited land as an illegal transaction executed as security for a Rs.20,000 loan (at 3% monthly interest) for the deceased father's cancer treatment. The court found the sale violated co-sharer laws since the property remained unpartitioned and one heir (brother Suresh) never consented. Ruling Rationale: Court established prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable loss favoring plaintiffs, finding the sale of undivided property without all heirs' consent violated the Consolidation and Fragmentation Act and Supreme Court precedent. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: RCS 1301642/2014 Outcome: Temporary injunction GRANTED. Defendant No.1 is restrained from alienating the suit agricultural property or creating any third-party interest until final disposal of the case. Key Facts: Plaintiffs challenged a 1997 sale deed for 72 acres of undivided inherited land as an illegal transaction executed as security for a Rs.20,000 loan (at 3% monthly interest) for the deceased father's cancer treatment. The court found the sale violated co-sharer laws since the property remained unpartitioned and one heir (brother Suresh) never consented. Ruling Rationale: Court established prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable loss favoring plaintiffs, finding the sale of undivided property without all heirs' consent violated the Consolidation and Fragmentation Act and Supreme Court precedent. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts