Ramesh Natthusa Gulalkari vs Prashant Prabhakar Gulalkari Advocate - WARKARI SANJAY KANHAIYALAL — 72/2016
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 8. Disposed: Uncontested--TRANSFERRED / MADE OVER on 16th March 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHWS070017502016
Filing Number
145/2016
Filing Date
02-09-2016
Registration No
72/2016
Registration Date
02-09-2016
Court
Civil Court Junior Division, Karanja
Judge
3-2nd Jt Civil Judge J.D. and J.M.F.C. Karanja
Decision Date
16th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--TRANSFERRED / MADE OVER
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Ramesh Natthusa Gulalkari
Adv. PINJARKAR DIGAMBAR KRISHNARAO
Respondent(s)
Prashant Prabhakar Gulalkari Advocate - WARKARI SANJAY KANHAIYALAL
Shashank Prabhakar Gulalkari
Sau. Usha Padmakar Kale
Akhil Ashokrao Bannore
Hearing History
Judge: 3-2nd Jt Civil Judge J.D. and J.M.F.C. Karanja
Disposed
Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready
Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready
Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready
Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 16-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 26-02-2026 | Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready |
| 27-01-2026 | Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready |
| 02-01-2026 | Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready |
| 20-11-2025 | Say / Hearing on Exh____Ready |
Interim Orders
The court allowed plaintiff Ramesh's application to amend paragraphs 2 and 3 of his partition suit plaint, which became necessary after the government acquired 0.7239 hectares of the disputed property for the Nagpur-Mumbai Express Highway, reducing available land from the original to 1H 62R. The court found the amendments essential for clarifying the real issue in controversy and caused no prejudice to defendants who failed to file objections despite notice, directing the plaintiff to submit the amended plaint within 14 days. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The court allowed plaintiff Ramesh's application to amend paragraphs 2 and 3 of his partition suit plaint, which became necessary after the government acquired 0.7239 hectares of the disputed property for the Nagpur-Mumbai Express Highway, reducing available land from the original to 1H 62R. The court found the amendments essential for clarifying the real issue in controversy and caused no prejudice to defendants who failed to file objections despite notice, directing the plaintiff to submit the amended plaint within 14 days. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts