Archana Narayan Gujar vs Sandip Ananda Gujar Others Advocate - Janugade A.R — 211/2022

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 1. Status: Hearing. Next hearing: 24th April 2026.

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHST130006792022

Hearing

Next Hearing

24th April 2026

Filing Number

251/2022

Filing Date

14-06-2022

Registration No

211/2022

Registration Date

14-06-2022

Court

Civil Court Junior Division , Patan

Judge

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

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 1

Petitioner(s)

Archana Narayan Gujar

Adv. Patil H.D.

Respondent(s)

Sandip Ananda Gujar Others Advocate - Janugade A.R

Swati Laxman Malusare

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Civil Judge Jr.Dn. J.M.F.C. Patan

06-03-2026

Hearing

17-01-2026

Hearing

07-11-2025

Hearing

29-08-2025

Hearing

29-07-2025

Hearing

Interim Orders

20-12-2023
Order on T.I.

Court Order Summary Case: R.D.M.Cr. 211/2022 | Order Date: 20/12/2023 | Court: Civil Court, Patan Outcome: The petition (Order 39 Rule 1, CPC 1908) seeking temporary relief/injunction against Respondent No. 1 has been DISMISSED. The court found that the petitioner failed to establish a prima facie case of misuse of power of attorney or wrongful sale of the property, as no preliminary evidence or credible documents supporting these allegations were placed on record. Accordingly, the court held that the petitioner lacks sufficient grounds for interim relief and rejected the petition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Order Summary Case: R.D.M.Cr. 211/2022 | Order Date: 20/12/2023 | Court: Civil Court, Patan Outcome: The petition (Order 39 Rule 1, CPC 1908) seeking temporary relief/injunction against Respondent No. 1 has been DISMISSED. The court found that the petitioner failed to establish a prima facie case of misuse of power of attorney or wrongful sale of the property, as no preliminary evidence or credible documents supporting these allegations were placed on record. Accordingly, the court held that the petitioner lacks sufficient grounds for interim relief and rejected the petition. 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 Junior Division , Patan All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case