Raju Vitthal Patale vs Shrikrishna Hanawata Dhadve Advocate - Raut Jitendra Rajaram — 16/2022
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 43(1). Status: Arguments. Next hearing: 16th June 2026.
M.C.A. - Misc.Civil Appeal
CNR: MHWS010008702022
Next Hearing
16th June 2026
Filing Number
429/2022
Filing Date
20-06-2022
Registration No
16/2022
Registration Date
20-06-2022
Court
District and Sessions Court, Washim
Judge
3-District Judge 2 and ASJ, Washim
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Raju Vitthal Patale
Adv. Lavhale Ganesh Abhimanyu
Rani Gajanan Patale
Sujani Raju Patale
Gajanan Ukanda Ladge
Kacharubai Narayan Hiwrale
Respondent(s)
Shrikrishna Hanawata Dhadve Advocate - Raut Jitendra Rajaram
Hearing History
Judge: 3-District Judge 2 and ASJ, Washim
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
Arguments
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 21-04-2026 | Arguments |
| 16-03-2026 | Arguments |
| 13-02-2026 | Arguments |
| 16-01-2026 | Arguments |
| 08-12-2025 | Arguments |
Interim Orders
In Case 16/2022 (Raju Vitthal Patale and others v. Shrikrishna Hanawata Dhadve Advocate), the District Judge's order dated 04/05/2023 granted Petitioner No. 2's application (Application No. 15) and directed them to immediately correct the defect in the court's name in the petition. The proposed correction was deemed to be a procedural defect of the court's name itself, which could be rectified, and no substantive changes to the petition would result from this correction. No order was made regarding costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
In Case 16/2022 (Raju Vitthal Patale and others v. Shrikrishna Hanawata Dhadve Advocate), the District Judge's order dated 04/05/2023 granted Petitioner No. 2's application (Application No. 15) and directed them to immediately correct the defect in the court's name in the petition. The proposed correction was deemed to be a procedural defect of the court's name itself, which could be rectified, and no substantive changes to the petition would result from this correction. No order was made regarding costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts