Vijay alias Devanand Ravindra Pote vs Sunita Damodar Gholve Advocate - Giranje Anurath Shantilal — 170/2020
Case under Specific Relief Act Section 16, 38. Status: Evidence Part Heard. Next hearing: 02nd July 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHSO160012272020
Next Hearing
02nd July 2026
Filing Number
235/2020
Filing Date
22-09-2020
Registration No
170/2020
Registration Date
28-09-2020
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Karmala
Judge
2-JT. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. KARMALA
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Vijay alias Devanand Ravindra Pote
Adv. Deokar J. D.
Dhanyakumar Ravindra Pote
Adv. Deokar J. D.
Respondent(s)
Sunita Damodar Gholve Advocate - Giranje Anurath Shantilal
Baydabai Bhanudas Pote
Adv. Giranje Anurath Shantilal
Hearing History
Judge: 2-JT. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. KARMALA
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 17-04-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 13-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 22-01-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 25-11-2025 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 09-10-2025 | Evidence Part Heard |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: 170/2020 Petition Dismissed The Joint Civil Judge dismissed the petition filed by Vijay and Dhanyakumar Pote regarding succession rights to agricultural land under the Hindu Succession Act, Section 22. The court found that the petitioners failed to establish the required prerequisites for a primary succession case, including proper evidence that they are Class I heirs in the direct line of succession. The court ruled that the respondents (Sunita Damodar Gholve and others) retain their rights to the disputed property, and ordered the petition rejected with costs to be adjusted in final decree. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: 170/2020 Petition Dismissed The Joint Civil Judge dismissed the petition filed by Vijay and Dhanyakumar Pote regarding succession rights to agricultural land under the Hindu Succession Act, Section 22. The court found that the petitioners failed to establish the required prerequisites for a primary succession case, including proper evidence that they are Class I heirs in the direct line of succession. The court ruled that the respondents (Sunita Damodar Gholve and others) retain their rights to the disputed property, and ordered the petition rejected with costs to be adjusted in final decree. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts