A- one Group Bildars and Devlopers through Pro. Mo. Jafar Mo. Umar and 1 vs Sau. Tarabai Vijay Rudy — 111/2022
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section cpc. Status: Evidence. Next hearing: 25th June 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHYA110018852022
Next Hearing
25th June 2026
Filing Number
174/2022
Filing Date
07-11-2022
Registration No
111/2022
Registration Date
07-11-2022
Court
Civil Judge Junior Division Umarkhed
Judge
9-3rd Joint Civil Judge JrDn and Judicial Magistrate FC Umarkhed
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
A- one Group Bildars and Devlopers through Pro. Mo. Jafar Mo. Umar and 1
Respondent(s)
Sau. Tarabai Vijay Rudy
Hearing History
Judge: 9-3rd Joint Civil Judge JrDn and Judicial Magistrate FC Umarkhed
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 23-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 18-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 09-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 02-04-2026 | Evidence |
| 12-03-2026 | Evidence |
Interim Orders
Summary: The court allowed the plaintiff's application to produce additional documents on record that were not filed with the original plaint, citing inadvertence. The court found that since the defendant had already referenced these documents during cross-examination, permitting their production would not prejudice the defendant and would assist in proper adjudication. The plaintiff was permitted to place the documents on record subject to payment of Rs. 1,000 as costs to the defendant, with the defendant retaining the right to challenge their admissibility and evidentiary value at the appropriate stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The court allowed the plaintiff's application to produce additional documents on record that were not filed with the original plaint, citing inadvertence. The court found that since the defendant had already referenced these documents during cross-examination, permitting their production would not prejudice the defendant and would assist in proper adjudication. The plaintiff was permitted to place the documents on record subject to payment of Rs. 1,000 as costs to the defendant, with the defendant retaining the right to challenge their admissibility and evidentiary value at the appropriate stage. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts