Suresh Nivrutti Ingle vs Vandana Satish Bansode Advocate - SALUNKHE KISAN NAMDEO — 40/2021
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 2. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 24th June 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHWS100012122021
Next Hearing
24th June 2026
Filing Number
137/2021
Filing Date
04-08-2021
Registration No
40/2021
Registration Date
04-08-2021
Court
Civil Judge Junior Division, Malegaon
Judge
1-CIVIL JUDGE J.D. J.M.F.C. MALEGAON
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Suresh Nivrutti Ingle
Adv. Sahastrabuddhe Pradip Ashok
Respondent(s)
Vandana Satish Bansode Advocate - SALUNKHE KISAN NAMDEO
Ranjana Santosh Gaikwad
Hearing History
Judge: 1-CIVIL JUDGE J.D. J.M.F.C. MALEGAON
Evidence
Issues
Issues
Issues
Issues
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 07-05-2026 | Evidence |
| 27-04-2026 | Issues |
| 06-04-2026 | Issues |
| 16-03-2026 | Issues |
| 20-02-2026 | Issues |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: 40/2021 - Suresh Nivrutti Ingle v. Vandana Satish Bansode Outcome: The court granted the interim injunction petition filed by Respondent 1 (Vandana Bansode). The court restrained the petitioner and his associate from interfering with the respondent's possession and enjoyment of the disputed agricultural land (Plot 24, measuring 0.90-0.91 hectares) pending final disposal of the main case. The respondent established prima facie ownership through a registered deed dated 22.05.2013, and the petitioner failed to substantiate his counter-claims regarding possession. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: 40/2021 - Suresh Nivrutti Ingle v. Vandana Satish Bansode Outcome: The court granted the interim injunction petition filed by Respondent 1 (Vandana Bansode). The court restrained the petitioner and his associate from interfering with the respondent's possession and enjoyment of the disputed agricultural land (Plot 24, measuring 0.90-0.91 hectares) pending final disposal of the main case. The respondent established prima facie ownership through a registered deed dated 22.05.2013, and the petitioner failed to substantiate his counter-claims regarding possession. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts