Panjab Khushalrao Khadase vs Dilip Vishwanath Khadase Advocate - BERIYA AJAYKUMAR SHANKARLAL — 109/2016
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 80(2). Status: Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready. Next hearing: 19th June 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHWS020003032016
Next Hearing
19th June 2026
Filing Number
313/2016
Filing Date
14-06-2016
Registration No
109/2016
Registration Date
14-06-2016
Court
Civil Court Senior Division, Washim
Judge
1-Civil Judge Sr. Dn. Washim.
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Panjab Khushalrao Khadase
Adv. Deshmukh Uday Achyutrao
Respondent(s)
Dilip Vishwanath Khadase Advocate - BERIYA AJAYKUMAR SHANKARLAL
Nimbaji Ramrao Khadase
Adv. BERIYA AJAYKUMAR SHANKARLAL
Deputy Superintendent of Land Record and Taluka Inspector
Adv. DHOBLE PURUDHOTTAM SADHASHIV
Tahsildar, Risod
Adv. DHOBLE PURUDHOTTAM SADHASHIV
State of Maharashtra Through Collector
Adv. DHOBLE PURUDHOTTAM SADHASHIV
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Civil Judge Sr. Dn. Washim.
Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready
Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready
Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready
Awaiting Notice
Evidence Part Heard
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 07-05-2026 | Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready |
| 23-04-2026 | Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready |
| 06-04-2026 | Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready |
| 01-04-2026 | Awaiting Notice |
| 16-03-2026 | Evidence Part Heard |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: Panjab Khushalrao Khadase v. Dilip Vishwanath Khadase (109/2016) Outcome: The temporary injunction petition filed by Respondent No. 1 (Dilip Khadase) was GRANTED. The court ordered that the petitioner must not obstruct the alternative road made available to Respondent No. 1 for accessing his agricultural land, and must not create any impediments until the final judgment in the underlying suit is delivered. Costs of the petition were imposed on Respondent No. 1. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Panjab Khushalrao Khadase v. Dilip Vishwanath Khadase (109/2016) Outcome: The temporary injunction petition filed by Respondent No. 1 (Dilip Khadase) was GRANTED. The court ordered that the petitioner must not obstruct the alternative road made available to Respondent No. 1 for accessing his agricultural land, and must not create any impediments until the final judgment in the underlying suit is delivered. Costs of the petition were imposed on Respondent No. 1. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts