Late Sampat Ramchandra Ingale Deceased,through legal heirs 1A Mr Santosh Sampat Ingale vs Kisan hariba ingale — 53/2024
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 96 & order 41. Status: Filing of Say on Exh___Unready. Next hearing: 10th April 2026.
R.C.A. - Regular Civil Appeal
CNR: MHST170006612024
e-Filing Number
27-09-2024
Filing Number
241/2024
Filing Date
07-Oct-2024
Registration No
53/2024
Registration Date
07-Oct-2024
Court
District and Session Court, Vaduj
Judge
1-District Judge -1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Vaduj
Last updated 26-Mar-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Late Sampat Ramchandra Ingale Deceased,through legal heirs 1A Mr Santosh Sampat Ingale
Adv. Patil P. N.
-
2.1B Savita @ Sangita Vishwanath Jadhav
Adv. Patil P. N.
-
3.1C Vijaya somnath patil
Adv. Prashant Patil
-
4.1D Manisha Santosh Shedage
Adv. Prashant Patil
-
5.Late jaysing Ramchandra Ingale deceased through legal heirs 2 A Dhairyasheel jayshing ingale
Adv. Prashant Patil
-
6.2B Anita sunil dhembare
Adv. Prashant Patil
-
7.2C Asha rajendra chavhan
Adv. Prashant Patil
-
8.2D Manisha sudhir jadhav
Adv. Prashant Patil
-
9.Suresh Sahebrao ingale
Adv. Patil P. N.
-
10.Sayaji sahebrao ingale
Adv. Patil P. N.
-
11.Late sonabai sahebrao ingale deceased through legal heirs appelant no three and four
Adv. Prashant Patil
-
12.Jayashree ramrao ingale
Adv. Prashant Patil
-
13.Sheetal ramrao ingale
Adv. Prashant Patil
-
14.Vaishali @ mangal nanasaheb surywanshi
Adv. Prashant Patil
-
15.Prabhavati @ bhamavati baban urf ramchandra hazare
Adv. Prashant Patil
-
16.Susheela shamrao dhembare
Adv. Prashant Patil
-
17.Sindhutai dinkar ghorpade
Adv. Prashant Patil
-
18.Ranjana vishvanath jadhav
Adv. Prashant Patil
-
19.Indutai sadashiv surywanshi
Adv. Prashant Patil
-
20.Tukaram maruti ingale
Adv. Prashant Patil
-
21.Bhimrao maruti ingale
Adv. Prashant Patil
-
22.Late vaijanta maruti ingale through legal heirs appellant no fourteen fifteen seventeen
Adv. Prashant Patil
-
23.Thakubai mansing kalange
Adv. Prashant Patil
Respondent(s)
-
1.Kisan hariba ingale
-
2.Late shivaji hariba ingale deceased through legal heirs 2A samindra shivaji ingale
-
3.2B Rukmini kakaso kapase
-
4.2c sunita vijay pawar
-
5.2D late subhash shivaji ingale deceased through legal heirs 2DA shriram subhash ingale
-
6.2DB sarika subhash ingale
-
7.Uttam hariba ingale
-
8.Ganpat hariba ingale
-
9.5A nanda shivaji pawar c/o Tejas Shivaji Pawar
-
10.Late radhabai tukaram mahadik deceased through legal heirs 6 A lata hanmant yadav
-
11.Prabhavati bhagvantrao nikam deceased through legal heirs 7 A swapnali Santosh Nikam
-
12.7B Yashraj santosh nikam
-
13.7C arav santosh nikam
-
14.Pramilabai laxmanrao jagdale
-
15.Suman adhikrao nikam
Case History
-
10-Apr-2026
Next hearingPending
-
06-Mar-2026
Filing of Say on Exh___Unready
District Judge -1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Vaduj
-
06-Feb-2026
Filing of Say on Exh___Unready
District Judge -1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Vaduj
-
23-Jan-2026
Bringing L.R.s
District Judge -1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Vaduj
-
12-Dec-2025
Bringing L.R.s
District Judge -1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Vaduj
-
17-Oct-2025
Awaiting R and P
District Judge -1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Vaduj
-
24-Sep-2025
Order on ExhibitView PDF
Summary: The application for temporary injunction filed by Respondent No. 3 was granted. The court restrained appellants from ousting respondents from the disputed property (Survey No. 484 and subdivided parcels 484/1-484/6) and from alienating, constructing on, or altering the property's nature until final disposal of the appeal. The court found the respondents established a prima facie case of entitlement to the ancestral joint family property, would suffer irreparable loss if the injunction was refused, and that the balance of convenience favored protection of the property's status quo pending appeal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
24-Sep-2025
Awaiting R and P
District Judge -1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Vaduj
-
23-Sep-2025
Order on Exh
District Judge -1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Vaduj
-
20-Sep-2025
Order on Exh
District Judge -1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Vaduj
-
19-Sep-2025
Argument on Exh.____Unready
District Judge -1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Vaduj
-
18-Aug-2025
Filing of Say on Exh___Ready
District Judge -1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Vaduj
-
18-Jun-2025
Hearing
District Judge -1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Vaduj
-
23-Apr-2025
Order on ExhibitView PDF
-
23-Apr-2025
Hearing
District Judge -1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Vaduj
-
22-Apr-2025
Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready
District Judge -1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Vaduj
-
16-Apr-2025
Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready
District Judge -1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Vaduj
-
11-Apr-2025
Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready
District Judge -1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Vaduj
-
04-Apr-2025
Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready
District Judge -1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Vaduj
-
21-Mar-2025
Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready
District Judge -1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Vaduj
-
28-Feb-2025
Notice_Unready
District Judge -1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Vaduj
-
14-Feb-2025
Notice_Unready
District Judge -1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Vaduj
-
31-Jan-2025
Notice_Unready
District Judge -1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Vaduj
-
17-Jan-2025
Notice_Unready
District Judge -1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Vaduj
-
06-Dec-2024
Notice_Unready
District Judge -1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Vaduj
-
22-Nov-2024
Notice_Unready
District Judge -1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Vaduj
-
23-Oct-2024
Notice_Unready
District Judge -1 and Addl. Sessions Judge Vaduj
-
07-Oct-2024
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
07-Oct-2024
Case filed
Registration No. 53/2024
Summary: The application for temporary injunction filed by Respondent No. 3 was granted. The court restrained appellants from ousting respondents from the disputed property (Survey No. 484 and subdivided parcels 484/1-484/6) and from alienating, constructing on, or altering the property's nature until final disposal of the appeal. The court found the respondents established a prima facie case of entitlement to the ancestral joint family property, would suffer irreparable loss if the injunction was refused, and that the balance of convenience favored protection of the property's status quo pending appeal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts