Suhasini Chandrakant Gurav vs Vijay Ramchandra Deshmukh Advocate - Methawade V.V. — 58/2021
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section Decleration. Status: Steps_Unready. Next hearing: 24th April 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHST180023202025
Next Hearing
24th April 2026
Filing Number
2321/2025
Filing Date
17-03-2021
Registration No
58/2021
Registration Date
17-03-2021
Court
Civil Court Senior Division, Vaduj
Judge
3-2nd Jt CJSD and Addl CJM Vaduj
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Suhasini Chandrakant Gurav
Adv. Katkar H.D.
Respondent(s)
Vijay Ramchandra Deshmukh Advocate - Methawade V.V.
Rajendra Ramchandra Deshmukh
Hearing History
Judge: 3-2nd Jt CJSD and Addl CJM Vaduj
Steps_Unready
Steps_Unready
Steps_Unready
Steps_Unready
Order on Exh
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | Steps_Unready |
| 30-01-2026 | Steps_Unready |
| 19-12-2025 | Steps_Unready |
| 07-11-2025 | Steps_Unready |
| 17-10-2025 | Order on Exh |
Interim Orders
Case Summary Outcome: Temporary Injunction Granted The court allowed the plaintiff's application for temporary injunction under Order 39, Rules 1-2 of the CPC. The defendants are restrained from obstructing the plaintiff's peaceful possession of 6 R. of land (Gat No. 1690) at Mayani, Satara district, until the suit's final decision. The court found the plaintiff established a prima facie case based on her registered sale deeds dated 18.10.1995 and revenue records showing her lawful ownership and possession, while the defendants failed to prove the disputed land falls within their ownership. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary Outcome: Temporary Injunction Granted The court allowed the plaintiff's application for temporary injunction under Order 39, Rules 1-2 of the CPC. The defendants are restrained from obstructing the plaintiff's peaceful possession of 6 R. of land (Gat No. 1690) at Mayani, Satara district, until the suit's final decision. The court found the plaintiff established a prima facie case based on her registered sale deeds dated 18.10.1995 and revenue records showing her lawful ownership and possession, while the defendants failed to prove the disputed land falls within their ownership. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts