Dharmesh Kishor Chheda vs Satpal Sitaram Malhotra Advocate - Chikane A. A. — 454/2023
Status: Defence Evidence. Next hearing: 27th March 2026.
Spl.C.S. - Spl.Civ.Suit
CNR: MHST200026032020
Next Hearing
27th March 2026
Filing Number
873/2023
Filing Date
11-03-2013
Registration No
454/2023
Registration Date
14-03-2013
Court
Civil Court Senior Division, Wai
Judge
1-Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai
Petitioner(s)
Dharmesh Kishor Chheda
Adv. Wadikar N.M
Ekta Dharmesh Chheda
Respondent(s)
Satpal Sitaram Malhotra Advocate - Chikane A. A.
Baldev Sitaram Malhotra
Kumar Builders Thro. Lalitkumar Kesarimal Jain
Mukesh satpat malhotra
Ashvini satpat malhotra
Rajendramohini satpat malhotra
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai
Defence Evidence
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
Evidence Part Heard
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 13-03-2026 | Defence Evidence |
| 06-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 06-02-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 30-01-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
| 23-01-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
Interim Orders
Summary Special Civil Petition No. 454/2023 (Dharamesh v. Satpal) was dismissed by the Divisional Bench on December 19, 2025. The court found that the petitioner's affidavit contained deficiencies in supporting documentation and that certain statements lacked credibility, particularly regarding email evidence and prior knowledge of alleged property transactions. The cross-examination revealed contradictions in the petitioner's testimony concerning the existence and sale of disputed property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary Special Civil Petition No. 454/2023 (Dharamesh v. Satpal) was dismissed by the Divisional Bench on December 19, 2025. The court found that the petitioner's affidavit contained deficiencies in supporting documentation and that certain statements lacked credibility, particularly regarding email evidence and prior knowledge of alleged property transactions. The cross-examination revealed contradictions in the petitioner's testimony concerning the existence and sale of disputed property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts