Sangita Bhairu Awaghade vs Ravindra Pandurang Giri etc 1 Advocate - Kamble Manojkumar Bhaurao — 367/2024
Case under Specific Relief Act Section 34,38. Status: List of Witness. Next hearing: 04th July 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHSO160013942024
e-Filing Number
21-10-2024
Filing Number
437/2024
Filing Date
23-Oct-2024
Registration No
367/2024
Registration Date
23-Oct-2024
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Karmala
Judge
2-Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Karmala
Last updated 03-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Sangita Bhairu Awaghade
Adv. Rokade S. A.
Respondent(s)
-
1.Ravindra Pandurang Giri etc 1 Advocate - Kamble Manojkumar Bhaurao
-
2.Dattatray Kushaba Kondalinge
Adv. Kamble Manojkumar Bhaurao
Case History
-
04-Jul-2026
Next hearingPending
-
02-May-2026
List of Witness
Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Karmala
-
13-Mar-2026
List of Witness
Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Karmala
-
09-Feb-2026
List of Witness
Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Karmala
-
20-Jan-2026
Order on ExhibitView PDF
Case Summary: 367/2024 Petitioner: Sangita Bhairu Awaghade Respondent: Ravindra Pandurang Giri and others Order Date: 20/01/2026 Outcome: Petition GRANTED. The court granted a temporary injunction restraining the respondent from interfering with the petitioner's peaceful possession and occupation of the disputed agricultural property (Plot No. 132, measuring 0.87 acres plus 0.05 acres, total 0.92 acres) in Karmala, Solapur district, until final judgment. The court found the petitioner has a stronger legal position and that irreparable harm would result if the injunction were denied. Both parties directed to proceed with the case on merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
20-Jan-2026
Issues
Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Karmala
-
08-Jan-2026
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Karmala
-
11-Dec-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Karmala
-
03-Dec-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Karmala
-
21-Nov-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Karmala
-
14-Nov-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Karmala
-
31-Oct-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Karmala
-
10-Oct-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Karmala
-
22-Sep-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Karmala
-
11-Sep-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Karmala
-
04-Sep-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Karmala
-
04-Sep-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Karmala
-
14-Aug-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Karmala
-
24-Jul-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Karmala
-
30-Jun-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Karmala
-
06-May-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Karmala
-
15-Apr-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Karmala
-
01-Apr-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Karmala
-
20-Mar-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Karmala
-
07-Mar-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Karmala
-
27-Feb-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Karmala
-
20-Feb-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Karmala
-
05-Feb-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Karmala
-
11-Dec-2024
W.S. and Say
Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Karmala
-
24-Oct-2024
Awaiting Summons
Jt. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. Karmala
-
23-Oct-2024
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
23-Oct-2024
Case filed
Registration No. 367/2024
Case Summary: 367/2024 Petitioner: Sangita Bhairu Awaghade Respondent: Ravindra Pandurang Giri and others Order Date: 20/01/2026 Outcome: Petition GRANTED. The court granted a temporary injunction restraining the respondent from interfering with the petitioner's peaceful possession and occupation of the disputed agricultural property (Plot No. 132, measuring 0.87 acres plus 0.05 acres, total 0.92 acres) in Karmala, Solapur district, until final judgment. The court found the petitioner has a stronger legal position and that irreparable harm would result if the injunction were denied. Both parties directed to proceed with the case on merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts