Raju Narayan Bhargude vs Hirabai Dyanoba Bhargude Advocate - mukadam — 160/2024
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section O 39,R 1-2. Status: Issues. Next hearing: 16th April 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHST080007192024
Next Hearing
16th April 2026
e-Filing Number
21-06-2024
Filing Number
198/2024
Filing Date
24-06-2024
Registration No
160/2024
Registration Date
25-06-2024
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Khandala
Judge
2-Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Khandala.
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Raju Narayan Bhargude
Adv. पंडीत बी.डब्ल्यू.
Ramdas Narayan Bhargude
Adv. Pandit C.B.
Lakshmi Narayan Bhargude
Adv. Pandit C.B.
Dattatrey Namdev Bhargade
Adv. Pandit C.B.
Prakash Namdev Bhargude
Adv. Pandit C.B.
Yamunabai Kishan Bhargude
Adv. Pandit C.B.
Navnath Kisan Bhargude
Adv. Pandit C.B.
Santosh Kishan Bhargude
Adv. Pandit C.B.
Respondent(s)
Hirabai Dyanoba Bhargude Advocate - mukadam
Manoj Dyanoba Bargude
Adv. mukadam
Lata Kailash Phadtare
Chandrabhaga Lakshman Khopade
Rekha Ram Gulumkar
Tushar Mohan Bhargude
Abhijeet Shivaji Kabule
Sachin Bhaskar Kale
Monali Tanaji Thopate
Sunil Pandharinath Kale
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Khandala.
Issues
Issues
Issues
Issues
Issues
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | Issues |
| 19-12-2025 | Issues |
| 31-10-2025 | Issues |
| 12-09-2025 | Issues |
| 04-08-2025 | Issues |
Interim Orders
Case Summary RCS No. 160/2024 | Khandala Civil Court | Dated 04.08.2025 The court rejected the plaintiffs' application for temporary injunction restraining defendants from disturbing their alleged possession of a 13-acre plot (Gat No. 1524) in Satara district. The court found that plaintiffs failed to establish a prima facie case, as they admitted the entire property was registered in defendants' names and provided only photographs as evidence of possession, without documentary proof of actual encroachment or hindrance by defendants. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary RCS No. 160/2024 | Khandala Civil Court | Dated 04.08.2025 The court rejected the plaintiffs' application for temporary injunction restraining defendants from disturbing their alleged possession of a 13-acre plot (Gat No. 1524) in Satara district. The court found that plaintiffs failed to establish a prima facie case, as they admitted the entire property was registered in defendants' names and provided only photographs as evidence of possession, without documentary proof of actual encroachment or hindrance by defendants. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts