Ashwini Subhash Patil vs Mahaveer Dagadu Randive Advocate - Sirsat T.B. — 131/2021
Case under Specific Relief Act Section 38. Status: Hearing. Next hearing: 08th June 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHSO190007262021
Next Hearing
08th June 2026
Filing Number
160/2021
Filing Date
05-03-2021
Registration No
131/2021
Registration Date
05-03-2021
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Mohal
Judge
3-II Jt. Civil Judge J. D. JMFC Mohol
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Ashwini Subhash Patil
Adv. Shinde Hemantukumar Bajarang
Respondent(s)
Mahaveer Dagadu Randive Advocate - Sirsat T.B.
Hearing History
Judge: 3-II Jt. Civil Judge J. D. JMFC Mohol
Hearing
Hearing
Hearing
Hearing
Hearing
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 18-04-2026 | Hearing |
| 13-03-2026 | Hearing |
| 20-01-2026 | Hearing |
| 16-12-2025 | Hearing |
| 06-11-2025 | Hearing |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: Reg. Civ. Suit No. 131/2021 Outcome: The court rejected the plaintiff's application for temporary injunction on 17.11.2022. Key Facts: Plaintiff Ashwini Subhash Patil sought a temporary injunction to prevent defendant Mahaveer Dagadu Randive from obstructing cultivation of agricultural land in Degaon, Solapur. The plaintiff claimed to have purchased the property via two sale deeds (2017, 2018) worth Rs. 6.5 lakhs. The defendant contended these were money-lending transactions where the property served as security for loans at 5% monthly interest, with agreed re-transfer upon repayment. Court's Finding: The court found no prima facie case in plaintiff's favor. A spot inspection by the District Deputy Registrar confirmed the defendant remained in possession of the property with his residence on it. The court determined the transaction was a money-lending arrangement rather than an outright sale, and that the plaintiff failed to establish actual possession necessary for an injunction restraining obstruction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Reg. Civ. Suit No. 131/2021 Outcome: The court rejected the plaintiff's application for temporary injunction on 17.11.2022. Key Facts: Plaintiff Ashwini Subhash Patil sought a temporary injunction to prevent defendant Mahaveer Dagadu Randive from obstructing cultivation of agricultural land in Degaon, Solapur. The plaintiff claimed to have purchased the property via two sale deeds (2017, 2018) worth Rs. 6.5 lakhs. The defendant contended these were money-lending transactions where the property served as security for loans at 5% monthly interest, with agreed re-transfer upon repayment. Court's Finding: The court found no prima facie case in plaintiff's favor. A spot inspection by the District Deputy Registrar confirmed the defendant remained in possession of the property with his residence on it. The court determined the transaction was a money-lending arrangement rather than an outright sale, and that the plaintiff failed to establish actual possession necessary for an injunction restraining obstruction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts