Ganpat Vittal Jadhav vs Namdev Bandu Gurav Advocate - Jagdale A.N. — 23/2017
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section injuction. Status: Steps. Next hearing: 10th April 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHST110001672017
Next Hearing
10th April 2026
Filing Number
42/2017
Filing Date
19-06-2017
Registration No
23/2017
Registration Date
19-06-2017
Court
Civil Court Junior Division , Medha
Judge
1-Civil Judge Jr.Dn J.M.F.C. Medha
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Ganpat Vittal Jadhav
Adv. Gore D.G.
Dattatraya Laxman Jadhav
Dyndev Laxman Jadhav
Smt Dropadibai Rajaram Jadhav
Shivaji Rajaram jadhav
Bajirao Bhau Jadhav
vitabai madhukar Jadhav
Respondent(s)
Namdev Bandu Gurav Advocate - Jagdale A.N.
Tanaji Namdev Jadhav
Dilip namdev Jadhav
smt Housabai Namdev Jadhav
Pandurang Laxman Jadhav
Smt Ratna Eknath Jadhav
Shubhanit Eknath Jadhav
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Civil Judge Jr.Dn J.M.F.C. Medha
Steps
Steps
Steps
Steps
Steps
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | Steps |
| 30-01-2026 | Steps |
| 02-01-2026 | Steps |
| 21-11-2025 | Steps |
| 17-10-2025 | Steps |
Interim Orders
Case Summary Temporary Injunction Granted The court allowed the plaintiffs' application for temporary injunction against Defendant No. 1, restraining him from obstructing their peaceful possession and cultivation of the disputed property (Gat No. 97). The court found that the plaintiffs established a prima facie case, demonstrating they have been protected tenants and cultivators of the property since 1948 through their predecessors, and that the balance of convenience favors them. The injunction remains in effect until the suit's final decision and does not affect the defendant's rights regarding temple management and religious ceremonies on the property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary Temporary Injunction Granted The court allowed the plaintiffs' application for temporary injunction against Defendant No. 1, restraining him from obstructing their peaceful possession and cultivation of the disputed property (Gat No. 97). The court found that the plaintiffs established a prima facie case, demonstrating they have been protected tenants and cultivators of the property since 1948 through their predecessors, and that the balance of convenience favors them. The injunction remains in effect until the suit's final decision and does not affect the defendant's rights regarding temple management and religious ceremonies on the property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts