Sanjay Chandrakant Panchal vs Laxman Shankar Gole Advocate - Manjalkar L.R. — 67/2023

Case under Specific Relief Act Section possession. Status: Order on Exh. Next hearing: 10th April 2026.

Order on Exh Next hearing 10-Apr-2026 this date has passed

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHST100004992023

Filing Number

126/2023

Filing Date

16-Sep-2023

Registration No

67/2023

Registration Date

16-Sep-2023

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Mahabaleshwar

Judge

1-Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Mahabaleshwar

Last updated 26-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Specific Relief Act Section possession

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Sanjay Chandrakant Panchal

    Adv. Bhandari H.J.

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Laxman Shankar Gole Advocate - Manjalkar L.R.

  2. 2.Amit Laxman Gole

  3. 3.Kaleshwari Sah. Housing Society Through Madhukar Gole

Case History

  1. 10-Apr-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 06-Mar-2026

    Order on Exh

    Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Mahabaleshwar

  3. 20-Feb-2026

    Order on Exh

    Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Mahabaleshwar

  4. 16-Jan-2026

    Order on Exh

    Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Mahabaleshwar

  5. 28-Nov-2025

    Order on Exh

    Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Mahabaleshwar

  6. 03-Oct-2025

    Order on Exh

    Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Mahabaleshwar

  7. 29-Aug-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Mahabaleshwar

  8. 25-Jul-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Mahabaleshwar

  9. 27-Jun-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Mahabaleshwar

  10. 24-Apr-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Mahabaleshwar

  11. 25-Mar-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Mahabaleshwar

  12. 28-Jan-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Mahabaleshwar

  13. 21-Nov-2024

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Mahabaleshwar

  14. 28-Sep-2024

    Issues

    Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Mahabaleshwar

  15. 12-Aug-2024

    Issues

    Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Mahabaleshwar

  16. 08-Jul-2024

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

    Summary The Civil Judge rejected the plaintiff's application for temporary and mandatory injunction under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 (R.C.S. No. 67/2023). The court found that the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case, as development agreements do not transfer actual physical possession and the plaintiff lacked legal standing since the original lease holders were not made parties to the suit. No costs were awarded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  17. 08-Jul-2024

    Issues

    Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Mahabaleshwar

  18. 21-Jun-2024

    Argument on Exh.____Ready

    Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Mahabaleshwar

  19. 30-Apr-2024

    Argument on Exh.____Ready

    Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Mahabaleshwar

  20. 14-Mar-2024

    Argument on Exh.____Ready

    Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Mahabaleshwar

  21. 22-Feb-2024

    Filing of Say on Exh___Unready

    Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Mahabaleshwar

  22. 11-Jan-2024

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Mahabaleshwar

  23. 14-Dec-2023

    W.S. and Say

    Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Mahabaleshwar

  24. 23-Nov-2023

    W.S. and Say

    Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Mahabaleshwar

  25. 19-Oct-2023

    W.S. and Say

    Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Mahabaleshwar

  26. 07-Oct-2023

    W.S. and Say

    Civil Judge Jr. Dn. J.M.F.C. Mahabaleshwar

  27. 20-Sep-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  28. 16-Sep-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. 67/2023

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Civil Judge rejected the plaintiff's application for temporary and mandatory injunction under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 (R.C.S. No. 67/2023). The court found that the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case, as development agreements do not transfer actual physical possession and the plaintiff lacked legal standing since the original lease holders were not made parties to the suit. No costs were awarded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case