Kishor Ashruji Gaikwad vs Ganesh Manik Gaikwad Advocate - MAGAR SHANKARRAO SAKHARAMJI — 57/2016
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 1. Status: Issues. Next hearing: 25th June 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHWS100013192016
Next Hearing
25th June 2026
Filing Number
102/2016
Filing Date
05-07-2016
Registration No
57/2016
Registration Date
05-07-2016
Court
Civil Judge Junior Division, Malegaon
Judge
2-Jt. CIVIL JUDGE J.D. J.M.F.C.MALEGAON
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Kishor Ashruji Gaikwad
Adv. LAD JALINDHAR GOVINDRAO
Respondent(s)
Ganesh Manik Gaikwad Advocate - MAGAR SHANKARRAO SAKHARAMJI
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Jt. CIVIL JUDGE J.D. J.M.F.C.MALEGAON
Issues
Issues
Order on Exh
Order on Exh
Order on Exh
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 10-06-2026 | Issues |
| 24-04-2026 | Issues |
| 08-04-2026 | Order on Exh |
| 16-03-2026 | Order on Exh |
| 02-03-2026 | Order on Exh |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: Kishor Ashruji Gaikwad v. Ganesh Manik Gaikwad Case No. 57/2016 | Joint Civil Judge & JMFC, Malegaon | Order dated 24.04.2026 Outcome The petitioner's (Kishor Ashruji Gaikwad's) interim relief application was partially allowed. The respondent (Ganesh Manik Gaikwad) was enjoined from obstructing the petitioner's access to his agricultural land through the established pathway. The respondent's counter-application was dismissed. The court found that the respondent had unlawfully blocked the petitioner's right of way and interfered with water flow to his field, causing irreparable harm; therefore, interim injunction against obstruction of the pathway was granted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Kishor Ashruji Gaikwad v. Ganesh Manik Gaikwad Case No. 57/2016 | Joint Civil Judge & JMFC, Malegaon | Order dated 24.04.2026 Outcome The petitioner's (Kishor Ashruji Gaikwad's) interim relief application was partially allowed. The respondent (Ganesh Manik Gaikwad) was enjoined from obstructing the petitioner's access to his agricultural land through the established pathway. The respondent's counter-application was dismissed. The court found that the respondent had unlawfully blocked the petitioner's right of way and interfered with water flow to his field, causing irreparable harm; therefore, interim injunction against obstruction of the pathway was granted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts