Chandkiran Sadashiv Nalawade vs Sharad Duryodhan Pawar — 11/2021
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 96. Status: Notice_Unready. Next hearing: 17th April 2026.
R.C.A. - Regular Civil Appeal
CNR: MHST170003482021
Next Hearing
17th April 2026
Filing Number
135/2021
Filing Date
29-04-2021
Registration No
11/2021
Registration Date
29-04-2021
Court
District and Session Court, Vaduj
Judge
1-District Judge -1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Vaduj
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Chandkiran Sadashiv Nalawade
Adv. Karande P.D.
Anil Sadashiv Nalavade
Respondent(s)
Sharad Duryodhan Pawar
Vishnu Jagu Jadhav(Legal Heir)
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District Judge -1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Vaduj
Notice_Unready
Notice_Unready
Amended Plaint
Filing of Say on Exh___Unready
Filing of Say on Exh___Unready
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | Notice_Unready |
| 16-01-2026 | Notice_Unready |
| 05-12-2025 | Amended Plaint |
| 17-10-2025 | Filing of Say on Exh___Unready |
| 22-08-2025 | Filing of Say on Exh___Unready |
Interim Orders
Summary In Regular Civil Appeal No. 11/2021, the Additional Sessions Judge at Vaduj allowed the appellants' application to stay execution of the decree passed by the trial court in Civil Suit No. 86 of 2009. The decree in question involved a specific performance claim regarding an agreement to sell property. The court found sufficient grounds to grant the stay, determining that no loss would be caused to the appellants by staying execution pending appeal disposal, and that staying execution was necessary in the interest of justice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary In Regular Civil Appeal No. 11/2021, the Additional Sessions Judge at Vaduj allowed the appellants' application to stay execution of the decree passed by the trial court in Civil Suit No. 86 of 2009. The decree in question involved a specific performance claim regarding an agreement to sell property. The court found sufficient grounds to grant the stay, determining that no loss would be caused to the appellants by staying execution pending appeal disposal, and that staying execution was necessary in the interest of justice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts