Sadashiv Anandrav More vs Arun Laxman Gulve — 123/2024

Case under Specific Relief Act Section 34. Status: Argument on Exh.____Ready. Next hearing: 20th June 2026.

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHSO150016222024

Argument on Exh.____Ready

Next Hearing

20th June 2026

e-Filing Number

24-09-2024

Filing Number

295/2024

Filing Date

24-09-2024

Registration No

123/2024

Registration Date

25-09-2024

Court

Civil Court Junior Division ,Akkalkot

Judge

1-Jt. C.J.J.D. and JMFC, Akkalkot

Acts & Sections

Specific Relief Act Section 34

Petitioner(s)

Sadashiv Anandrav More

Adv. Kurdukar Manasi Anand

Respondent(s)

Arun Laxman Gulve

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Jt. C.J.J.D. and JMFC, Akkalkot

24-04-2026

Argument on Exh.____Ready

04-04-2026

Evidence

13-03-2026

Evidence

24-02-2026

Evidence

17-01-2026

Evidence

Interim Orders

05-07-2025
Order on Exhibit

Case 123/2024 Summary: Defendant Arun Gulve successfully challenged a "No Written Statement" order passed against him on 17/01/2025. The court allowed his application, set aside the no written statement order, and condoned the delay in filing his written statement in the perpetual injunction suit filed by plaintiff Sadashiv More. The court found that while the defendant's reason (non-receipt of documents) was not entirely satisfactory, rejecting the application would cause irreparable harm by depriving him of his right to present his defence, whereas allowing it would cause minimal prejudice to plaintiffs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case 123/2024 Summary: Defendant Arun Gulve successfully challenged a "No Written Statement" order passed against him on 17/01/2025. The court allowed his application, set aside the no written statement order, and condoned the delay in filing his written statement in the perpetual injunction suit filed by plaintiff Sadashiv More. The court found that while the defendant's reason (non-receipt of documents) was not entirely satisfactory, rejecting the application would cause irreparable harm by depriving him of his right to present his defence, whereas allowing it would cause minimal prejudice to plaintiffs. 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 ,Akkalkot All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case