Govind Ramchandra Ghagare vs Ravikiran Ravindranath Bhurale — 33/2024
Case under Specific Relief Act Section 38. Status: Argument on Exh.____Unready. Next hearing: 24th July 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHSO190002412024
Next Hearing
24th July 2026
e-Filing Number
01-02-2024
Filing Number
54/2024
Filing Date
01-02-2024
Registration No
33/2024
Registration Date
03-02-2024
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Mohal
Judge
3-II Jt. Civil Judge J. D. JMFC Mohol
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Govind Ramchandra Ghagare
Adv. DESHPANDE AMOL VYANKATESH
Respondent(s)
Ravikiran Ravindranath Bhurale
Prakashchandra Ravindranath Bhurale
Raja Alias Raju Ravindranath Bhurale
Hearing History
Judge: 3-II Jt. Civil Judge J. D. JMFC Mohol
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Steps
Hearing
Hearing
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 16-04-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
| 13-03-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
| 12-02-2026 | Steps |
| 07-01-2026 | Hearing |
| 20-12-2025 | Hearing |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: 33/2024 Outcome: The court rejected the plaintiff's application for police protection under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The plaintiff sought police protection to enforce a temporary injunction order against agricultural land obstruction by defendants. The court found the application lacked merit due to: (1) a four-month delay between the alleged August 2024 incident and December 2024 application filing; (2) absence of recent obstruction incidents; (3) availability of specific remedies under Order 39 Rule 2-A of the CPC; and (4) insufficient evidence of grave emergency warranting police intervention. The suit regarding final possession remains pending. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: 33/2024 Outcome: The court rejected the plaintiff's application for police protection under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The plaintiff sought police protection to enforce a temporary injunction order against agricultural land obstruction by defendants. The court found the application lacked merit due to: (1) a four-month delay between the alleged August 2024 incident and December 2024 application filing; (2) absence of recent obstruction incidents; (3) availability of specific remedies under Order 39 Rule 2-A of the CPC; and (4) insufficient evidence of grave emergency warranting police intervention. The suit regarding final possession remains pending. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts