Sarjerao Jagganath Patil vs Govt. of Maharashtra Through Honble Collector, Satara — 393/2022
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section Injection. Status: Argument on Exh.____Unready. Next hearing: 10th April 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHST050004002022
Next Hearing
10th April 2026
Filing Number
408/2022
Filing Date
10-06-2022
Registration No
393/2022
Registration Date
13-06-2022
Court
Civil Court Senior Division , Karad
Judge
4-3rd Jt. Civil Judge Senior Division and Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karad
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Sarjerao Jagganath Patil
Adv. Patil N. S.
Ashok Ramchandra Shinde
Adv. Dange A.R.
Respondent(s)
Govt. of Maharashtra Through Honble Collector, Satara
Madhukar Rajaram Jadhav
Adv. Dange A.R.
Ramesh Rajaram Jadhav
Arun Rajaram Jadhav
Adv. Dange A.R.
Hearing History
Judge: 4-3rd Jt. Civil Judge Senior Division and Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karad
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
| 06-02-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
| 09-01-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
| 19-12-2025 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
| 21-11-2025 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
Interim Orders
Case Summary Case: Civil Regular Petition No. 393/2022, Order No. 40 Outcome: The petition filed by the applicant against defendants 2-4 is dismissed as lacking legal merit. The court rejected the applicant's claims regarding the existence and status of certain roads/properties, finding insufficient evidence and holding that the burden of proof rests with the applicant to establish their factual assertions through proper documentation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary Case: Civil Regular Petition No. 393/2022, Order No. 40 Outcome: The petition filed by the applicant against defendants 2-4 is dismissed as lacking legal merit. The court rejected the applicant's claims regarding the existence and status of certain roads/properties, finding insufficient evidence and holding that the burden of proof rests with the applicant to establish their factual assertions through proper documentation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts