MAHESH KUMAR BHAGAT vs KAILSH BHAGAT AND OTHERS — 101002/2015
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 26. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 19th March 2026.
Title Suit
CNR: BRKT120000912015
Filing Number
101002/2015
Filing Date
09-10-2015
Registration No
101002/2015
Registration Date
09-10-2015
Court
Barsoi Civil Division
Judge
1-Sub judge
Decision Date
19th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
MAHESH KUMAR BHAGAT
Respondent(s)
KAILSH BHAGAT AND OTHERS
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Sub judge
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
HEARING
HEARING
Settlement of Issues & Proceedings u/s 89crpc
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 19-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 16-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 11-03-2026 | HEARING |
| 26-02-2026 | HEARING |
| 25-02-2026 | Settlement of Issues & Proceedings u/s 89crpc |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The Civil Judge at Barsoi, Katihar dismissed the plaintiff's pre-emption suit against the defendants. The court found that the suit property had already been partitioned among family members in 1997, with each co-sharer receiving separate possession of their respective shares. Since the property was no longer held as joint Hindu family property at the time of the contested sale deeds dated 11.10.2014, the plaintiff's right to pre-emption under Section 22 of the Hindu Succession Act could not be exercised. The court awarded costs of ₹40,000 to the contesting defendants. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Decision Summary The Civil Judge at Barsoi, Katihar dismissed the plaintiff's pre-emption suit against the defendants. The court found that the suit property had already been partitioned among family members in 1997, with each co-sharer receiving separate possession of their respective shares. Since the property was no longer held as joint Hindu family property at the time of the contested sale deeds dated 11.10.2014, the plaintiff's right to pre-emption under Section 22 of the Hindu Succession Act could not be exercised. The court awarded costs of ₹40,000 to the contesting defendants. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts