Shantappa Siddanna Patil vs Sanganna Nageshi Patil Advocate - Boralkar S.A. — 102/2024

Case under Specific Relief Act Section 34. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 15th June 2026.

Evidence Next hearing 15-Jun-2026 this date has passed

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHSO150011942024

e-Filing Number

16-07-2024

Filing Number

245/2024

Filing Date

26-Jul-2024

Registration No

102/2024

Registration Date

26-Jul-2024

Court

Civil Court Junior Division ,Akkalkot

Judge

2-Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.

Last updated 03-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Specific Relief Act Section 34

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Shantappa Siddanna Patil

    Adv. Shahabade Mallinath Gurubasappa

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Sanganna Nageshi Patil Advocate - Boralkar S.A.

  2. 2.Sugalabai Sanganna Patil

  3. 3.Santosh Sanganna Patil

  4. 4.Savita Santosh Patil

  5. 5.Mahadev Nageshi Patil

Case History

  1. 15-Jun-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 05-May-2026

    Evidence

    Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.

  3. 09-Apr-2026

    Evidence

    Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.

  4. 13-Mar-2026

    Evidence

    Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.

  5. 04-Mar-2026

    Evidence

    Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.

  6. 20-Jan-2026

    Evidence

    Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.

  7. 10-Dec-2025

    Evidence

    Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.

  8. 03-Nov-2025

    Evidence

    Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.

  9. 22-Sep-2025

    Evidence

    Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.

  10. 14-Aug-2025

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

    Case Summary: Shantappa Siddanna Patil v. Sanganna Nageshi Patil & Others (R.C.S. 102/2024) The plaintiff's application for appointment of a Court Commissioner under Order XXVI Rule 9 CPC to conduct measurements of partitioned property (Gat No.326) was rejected with costs. The court held that a Court Commissioner cannot be appointed to collect evidence for parties or ascertain their possession of property portions. The plaintiff must prove his own possession through evidence at trial, and the court may only appoint a Commissioner suo moto after evidence is adduced, if clarification becomes necessary. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  11. 14-Aug-2025

    Evidence

    Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.

  12. 05-Aug-2025

    Order

    Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.

  13. 01-Aug-2025

    Order on Exh

    Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.

  14. 28-Jul-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Ready

    Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.

  15. 14-Jul-2025

    Reply/Say

    Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.

  16. 11-Jun-2025

    List of Witness

    Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.

  17. 01-Apr-2025

    Issues

    Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.

  18. 21-Feb-2025

    Issues

    Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.

  19. 10-Jan-2025

    Issues

    Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.

  20. 05-Dec-2024

    Issues

    Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.

  21. 05-Nov-2024

    Issues

    Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.

  22. 26-Sep-2024

    Order on T.I.View PDF

  23. 26-Sep-2024

    Issues

    Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.

  24. 25-Sep-2024

    Order

    Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.

  25. 21-Sep-2024

    Argument on Exh.____Ready

    Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.

  26. 19-Sep-2024

    Argument on Exh.____Ready

    Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.

  27. 13-Sep-2024

    Argument on Exh.____Ready

    Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.

  28. 29-Aug-2024

    Argument on Exh.____Ready

    Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.

  29. 23-Aug-2024

    Order on Exh

    Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.

  30. 13-Aug-2024

    Notice_Unready

    Cjjd and JMFC Akkalkot.

  31. 03-Aug-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  32. 26-Jul-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 102/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Shantappa Siddanna Patil v. Sanganna Nageshi Patil & Others (R.C.S. 102/2024) The plaintiff's application for appointment of a Court Commissioner under Order XXVI Rule 9 CPC to conduct measurements of partitioned property (Gat No.326) was rejected with costs. The court held that a Court Commissioner cannot be appointed to collect evidence for parties or ascertain their possession of property portions. The plaintiff must prove his own possession through evidence at trial, and the court may only appoint a Commissioner suo moto after evidence is adduced, if clarification becomes necessary. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case