Pushpasheela Dhirysheel Shelake vs The State of Maharashtra @ Collector Satara — 37/2023

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section (). Status: Argument on Exh.____Unready. Next hearing: 21st April 2026.

Argument on Exh.____Unready Next hearing 21-Apr-2026 this date has passed

R.C.S. - Reg.Civil Suit

CNR: MHST200002952020

Filing Number

98/2023

Filing Date

09-Feb-2018

Registration No

37/2023

Registration Date

14-Feb-2018

Court

Civil Court Senior Division, Wai

Judge

1-Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

Last updated 26-Mar-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section ()

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Pushpasheela Dhirysheel Shelake

    Adv. Shevade Chaitanya Laxman

  2. 2.Satvasheel Dhiryasheel Shelke

  3. 3.Rajendra Dhiryasheel Shelke

  4. 4.Ravindra Dhirysheel Shelke

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.The State of Maharashtra @ Collector Satara

  2. 2.SubDivisinal Officer

Case History

  1. 21-Apr-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 06-Mar-2026

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  3. 23-Jan-2026

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  4. 12-Dec-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  5. 14-Nov-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  6. 14-Oct-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  7. 16-Sep-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  8. 12-Aug-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  9. 22-Jul-2025

    Order on ExhibitView PDF

  10. 22-Jul-2025

    Order on T.I.View PDF

    Case Summary Case: Pushpshil vs State of Maharashtra (R.C.S No. 37/2023) Outcome: The court rejected the application filed by Defendants 18 and 19 seeking rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. The court found that the plaintiffs are not challenging the land acquisition proceedings or the legality of the 2001 award; rather, they seek declaration that the award does not bind their inherited property shares and alternatively seek partition. Since the suit does not challenge the acquisition proceedings, it is not barred by the Land Acquisition Act, and the limitation question is a mixed question of law and facts to be resolved during trial. The plaint adequately discloses a cause of action, allowing the suit to proceed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  11. 22-Jul-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  12. 18-Jul-2025

    Order on Exh

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  13. 16-Jul-2025

    Order on Exh

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  14. 04-Jul-2025

    Order on Exh

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  15. 20-Jun-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  16. 15-Apr-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  17. 08-Apr-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  18. 28-Mar-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  19. 28-Feb-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  20. 07-Feb-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  21. 17-Jan-2025

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  22. 03-Dec-2024

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  23. 18-Oct-2024

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  24. 27-Sep-2024

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  25. 30-Aug-2024

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  26. 06-Aug-2024

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  27. 26-Jul-2024

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  28. 19-Jul-2024

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  29. 02-Jul-2024

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  30. 26-Apr-2024

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  31. 05-Apr-2024

    Argument on Exh.____Unready

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  32. 01-Mar-2024

    Unready Board

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  33. 05-Feb-2024

    Unready Board

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  34. 04-Dec-2023

    Unready Board

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  35. 25-Sep-2023

    Unready Board

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  36. 14-Aug-2023

    Unready Board

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  37. 11-Jul-2023

    Unready Board

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  38. 08-Jun-2023

    Unready Board

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  39. 12-Apr-2023

    Unready Board

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  40. 10-Feb-2023

    Unready Board

    Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai

  41. 24-Jan-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  42. 09-Feb-2018

    Case filed

    Registration No. 37/2023

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary Case: Pushpshil vs State of Maharashtra (R.C.S No. 37/2023) Outcome: The court rejected the application filed by Defendants 18 and 19 seeking rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC. The court found that the plaintiffs are not challenging the land acquisition proceedings or the legality of the 2001 award; rather, they seek declaration that the award does not bind their inherited property shares and alternatively seek partition. Since the suit does not challenge the acquisition proceedings, it is not barred by the Land Acquisition Act, and the limitation question is a mixed question of law and facts to be resolved during trial. The plaint adequately discloses a cause of action, allowing the suit to proceed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case