GAURI SHANKAR TIWARI vs CHANDESWAR TIWARI AND OTHERS — 652/2018
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 26. Status: Arguments. Next hearing: 27th May 2026.
Partion Suit - TITLE PARTITION SUIT
CNR: BREC320000772015
Filing Number
63/2015
Filing Date
23-Dec-2015
Registration No
652/2018
Registration Date
23-Dec-2015
Court
Areraj Civil Division
Judge
3-Sub Judge-3-Cum-Acjm
Last updated 07-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.GAURI SHANKAR TIWARI
Adv. NA
Respondent(s)
-
1.CHANDESWAR TIWARI AND OTHERS
Case History
-
27-May-2026
Next hearingPending
-
21-Apr-2026
Arguments
Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate -I
-
10-Mar-2026
Arguments
Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate -I
-
07-Feb-2026
Arguments
Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate -I
-
02-Feb-2026
Arguments
Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate -I
-
19-Jan-2026
Arguments
Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate -I
-
12-Jan-2026
Arguments
Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate -I
-
05-Jan-2026
Arguments
Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate -I
-
03-Jan-2026
Arguments
Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate -I
-
20-Dec-2025
Arguments
Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate -I
-
10-Nov-2025
Arguments
Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate -I
-
08-Nov-2025
Arguments
Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate -I
-
08-Oct-2025
Arguments
Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate -I
-
02-Sep-2025
Arguments
Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate -I
-
29-Jul-2025
Arguments
Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate -I
-
15-Jul-2025
Arguments
Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate -I
-
08-Jul-2025
Arguments
Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate -I
-
01-Jul-2025
Arguments
Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate -I
-
17-Jun-2025
Evidence
Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate -I
-
24-May-2025
Arguments
Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate -I
-
29-Apr-2025
Arguments
Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate -I
-
07-Apr-2025
Arguments
Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate -I
-
10-Mar-2025
Arguments
Sub Judge
-
04-Mar-2025
Arguments
Sub Judge
-
03-Mar-2025
Arguments
Sub Judge
-
01-Mar-2025
Arguments
Sub Judge
-
27-Feb-2025
Arguments
Sub Judge
-
25-Feb-2025
Arguments
Sub Judge
-
19-Feb-2025
Arguments
Sub Judge
-
18-Feb-2025
Arguments
Sub Judge
-
11-Feb-2025
Arguments
Sub Judge
-
05-Feb-2025
Arguments
Sub Judge
-
25-Jan-2025
Arguments
Sub Judge
-
16-Jan-2025
Arguments
Sub Judge
-
06-Jan-2025
Arguments
Sub Judge
-
16-Dec-2024
Arguments
Sub Judge
-
09-Dec-2024
Arguments
Sub Judge
-
04-Dec-2024
Arguments
Sub Judge
-
21-Nov-2024
Arguments
Sub Judge
-
19-Nov-2024
Arguments
Sub Judge
-
22-Oct-2024
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
30-Sep-2024
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
26-Sep-2024
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
12-Sep-2024
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
10-Sep-2024
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
27-Aug-2024
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
21-Aug-2024
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
14-Aug-2024
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
15-Jul-2024
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
01-Jul-2024
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
26-Jun-2024
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
19-Jun-2024
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
11-Jun-2024
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
01-Jun-2024
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
20-Apr-2024
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
20-Mar-2024
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
28-Feb-2024
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
02-Feb-2024
Arguments
Sub Judge
-
20-Jan-2024
Arguments
Sub Judge
-
09-Jan-2024
Arguments
Sub Judge
-
15-Dec-2023
OrderView PDF
Summary: The court allowed the defendant's application to present documents (items 1-19 and 29-30 from the application list) that are over 30 years old by reopening evidence, finding the defendant showed gross negligence by requesting evidence closure after 8 years. However, for remaining documents, the court directed the defendant to deposit ₹5,000 as cost and complete all presentation procedures within the next five dates, with case adjourned for further proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
15-Dec-2023
Arguments
Sub Judge
-
04-Oct-2023
Arguments
-
23-Sep-2023
Arguments
-
30-Aug-2023
Arguments
-
02-Aug-2023
Arguments
Sub Judge
-
19-Jul-2023
Arguments
Sub Judge
-
21-Jun-2023
Arguments
Sub Judge
-
07-Jun-2023
Arguments
Sub Judge
-
17-May-2023
Arguments
Sub Judge
-
20-Apr-2023
Arguments
Sub Judge
-
06-Apr-2023
Arguments
Sub Judge
-
02-Mar-2023
Arguments
Sub Judge
-
09-Feb-2023
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
05-Jan-2023
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
24-Nov-2022
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
14-Oct-2022
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
08-Sep-2022
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
01-Aug-2022
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
04-Jul-2022
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
30-May-2022
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
18-May-2022
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
10-May-2022
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
08-Apr-2022
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
07-Mar-2022
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
03-Feb-2022
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
30-Nov-2021
Evidence
-
06-Sep-2021
Evidence
-
19-Jul-2021
Evidence
-
31-May-2021
Evidence
-
26-Apr-2021
Evidence
-
22-Mar-2021
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
06-Mar-2021
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
09-Feb-2021
Evidence
Sub Judge-3-Cum-Acjm
-
08-Feb-2021
Evidence
Sub Judge-3-Cum-Acjm
-
07-Dec-2020
Evidence
Sub Judge-3-Cum-Acjm
-
21-Jan-2020
Evidence
Sub Judge-3-Cum-Acjm
-
24-Dec-2019
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
25-Nov-2019
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
26-Aug-2019
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
25-Aug-2019
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
13-Jun-2019
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
13-May-2019
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
11-Apr-2019
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
28-Feb-2019
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
24-Jan-2019
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
20-Dec-2018
Evidence
Sub Judge
-
22-Nov-2018
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
23-Dec-2015
Case filed
Registration No. 652/2018
Summary: The court allowed the defendant's application to present documents (items 1-19 and 29-30 from the application list) that are over 30 years old by reopening evidence, finding the defendant showed gross negligence by requesting evidence closure after 8 years. However, for remaining documents, the court directed the defendant to deposit ₹5,000 as cost and complete all presentation procedures within the next five dates, with case adjourned for further proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts