Mahadev Dhondiram Kadam vs Rajendra Bhimrao Gaikawad Advocate - Jadhav B. B. — 23/2024

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section O/37. Status: Argument on Exh.____Unready. Next hearing: 10th April 2026.

Sum.Civ.Suit - Summary Civil Suit

CNR: MHST050010022024

Argument on Exh.____Unready

Next Hearing

10th April 2026

e-Filing Number

14-08-2024

Filing Number

1035/2024

Filing Date

14-08-2024

Registration No

23/2024

Registration Date

03-09-2024

Court

Civil Court Senior Division , Karad

Judge

2-Civil Judge Senior Division and Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karad

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section O/37

Petitioner(s)

Mahadev Dhondiram Kadam

Adv. PATIL VIJAYSINH PANDURANG

Respondent(s)

Rajendra Bhimrao Gaikawad Advocate - Jadhav B. B.

Hearing History

Judge: 2-Civil Judge Senior Division and Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karad

06-03-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

06-02-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

23-01-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

09-01-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

20-12-2025

Filing of Say on Exh___Unready

Interim Orders

29-11-2025
Order on Exhibit

Summary: The Court of Civil Judge Senior Division, Karad allowed the defendant's application for production of documents in Summary Suit No.23/2024 (Mahadev Dhondiram Kadam v. Rajendra Bhimrao Gaikwad). Permission was granted to the defendant to produce documents listed in Exhibit 22 on record in support of his pending application for leave to defend, as these documents were found necessary to determine the real questions in controversy and would cause no prejudice to the plaintiff. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The Court of Civil Judge Senior Division, Karad allowed the defendant's application for production of documents in Summary Suit No.23/2024 (Mahadev Dhondiram Kadam v. Rajendra Bhimrao Gaikwad). Permission was granted to the defendant to produce documents listed in Exhibit 22 on record in support of his pending application for leave to defend, as these documents were found necessary to determine the real questions in controversy and would cause no prejudice to the plaintiff. 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 Senior Division , Karad All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case