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

List of Witness

Next Hearing

04th July 2026

e-Filing Number

21-10-2024

Filing Number

437/2024

Filing Date

23-10-2024

Registration No

367/2024

Registration Date

23-10-2024

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Karmala

Judge

2-JT. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. KARMALA

Acts & Sections

Specific Relief Act Section 34,38

Petitioner(s)

Sangita Bhairu Awaghade

Adv. Rokade S. A.

Respondent(s)

Ravindra Pandurang Giri etc 1 Advocate - Kamble Manojkumar Bhaurao

Dattatray Kushaba Kondalinge

Adv. Kamble Manojkumar Bhaurao

Hearing History

Judge: 2-JT. C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C. KARMALA

02-05-2026

List of Witness

13-03-2026

List of Witness

09-02-2026

List of Witness

20-01-2026

Issues

08-01-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

Interim Orders

20-01-2026
Order on Exhibit

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.

casestatus.in Summary

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.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Civil Court Junior Division , Karmala All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case