Brahmdev Sadashiv Babar vs Hanmant Bhimrao Kate Advocate - Kasabe M. V. — 297/2024

Case under Specific Relief Act Section 22. Status: Issues. Next hearing: 24th July 2026.

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHSO200010172024

Issues

Next Hearing

24th July 2026

e-Filing Number

21-06-2024

Filing Number

364/2024

Filing Date

24-06-2024

Registration No

297/2024

Registration Date

27-06-2024

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Sangola

Judge

6-C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C.Sangola.

Acts & Sections

Specific Relief Act Section 22

Petitioner(s)

Brahmdev Sadashiv Babar

Adv. Kedar Rajaram Ramchandra

Respondent(s)

Hanmant Bhimrao Kate Advocate - Kasabe M. V.

Hearing History

Judge: 6-C.J.J.D. J.M.F.C.Sangola.

28-04-2026

Issues

23-04-2026

Order on Exh

20-04-2026

Order on Exh

08-04-2026

Order on Exh

13-03-2026

Order on Exh

Interim Orders

28-04-2026
Order on T.I.

Summary of Case 297/2024 Petitioner (Wadi): Brahmdev Sadashiv Babar Respondent (Pratiawadi): Hanmant Bhimrao Kate Advocate Outcome: The petitioner's application for interim injunction (Notice 5) was ALLOWED. The court issued a temporary restraining order prohibiting the respondent from obstructing the petitioner's peaceful possession of the disputed agricultural property (0.80 acres in Ligadewadi, Sangola taluk) or interfering with it until final judgment. The respondent's counter-application for interim relief (Notice 41) was DISMISSED. The petitioner's application for interim relief (Notice 26) was absorbed into Notice 5. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of Case 297/2024 Petitioner (Wadi): Brahmdev Sadashiv Babar Respondent (Pratiawadi): Hanmant Bhimrao Kate Advocate Outcome: The petitioner's application for interim injunction (Notice 5) was ALLOWED. The court issued a temporary restraining order prohibiting the respondent from obstructing the petitioner's peaceful possession of the disputed agricultural property (0.80 acres in Ligadewadi, Sangola taluk) or interfering with it until final judgment. The respondent's counter-application for interim relief (Notice 41) was DISMISSED. The petitioner's application for interim relief (Notice 26) was absorbed into Notice 5. 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 , Sangola All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case