JAGNARAYAN vs BINDESWARI SHARMA Advocate - SURESH PD. RAI — 625/2010
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 9. Status: Order. Next hearing: 05th May 2026.
Partion Suit - TITLE PARTITION SUIT
CNR: BRSR120000292010
Filing Number
625/2010
Filing Date
05-Oct-2010
Registration No
625/2010
Registration Date
05-Oct-2010
Court
Sonepur Civil Division
Judge
3-Sub Judge II
Last updated 25-Apr-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.JAGNARAYAN
Adv. SHAMBHU SINGH
Respondent(s)
-
1.BINDESWARI SHARMA Advocate - SURESH PD. RAI
Case History
-
05-May-2026
Next hearingPending
-
07-Apr-2026
Order
Sub Judge II
-
10-Mar-2026
Order
Sub Judge II
-
03-Feb-2026
Order
Sub Judge II
-
06-Jan-2026
Arguments
Sub Judge II
-
23-Dec-2025
Arguments
Sub Judge II
-
09-Dec-2025
Arguments
Sub Judge II
-
11-Nov-2025
Arguments
Sub Judge II
-
14-Oct-2025
Arguments
Sub Judge II
-
07-Oct-2025
Arguments
Sub Judge II
-
16-Sep-2025
Arguments
Sub Judge II
-
19-Aug-2025
Arguments
Sub Judge II
-
29-Jul-2025
Arguments
Sub Judge II
-
15-Jul-2025
Arguments
Sub Judge II
-
24-Jun-2025
Arguments
Sub Judge II
-
17-Jun-2025
Arguments
Sub Judge II
-
03-Jun-2025
Arguments
Sub Judge II
-
06-May-2025
Arguments
Sub Judge II
-
08-Apr-2025
Arguments
Sub Judge II
-
11-Mar-2025
Evidence
Sub Judge II
-
04-Feb-2025
Evidence
Sub Judge II
-
07-Jan-2025
Evidence
Sub Judge II
-
17-Dec-2024
Evidence
Sub Judge II
-
26-Nov-2024
Evidence
Sub Judge II
-
12-Nov-2024
Evidence
Sub Judge II
-
22-Oct-2024
Evidence
Sub Judge II
-
01-Oct-2024
Evidence
Sub Judge II
-
27-Aug-2024
Evidence
Sub-Judge
-
23-Jul-2024
Evidence
Sub-Judge
-
11-Jun-2024
Evidence
Sub-Judge
-
14-May-2024
Evidence
Sub-Judge
-
02-Apr-2024
Evidence
Sub-Judge
-
12-Mar-2024
Evidence
Sub-Judge
-
06-Feb-2024
Evidence
Sub-Judge
-
16-Dec-2023
Evidence
Sub-Judge
-
17-Oct-2023
Evidence
Sub-Judge
-
05-Sep-2023
Evidence
Sub-Judge
-
25-Jul-2023
Evidence
Sub-Judge
-
04-Jul-2023
Hearing
Sub-Judge
-
13-Jun-2023
Hearing
Sub-Judge
-
11-May-2023
Hearing
Sub-Judge
-
17-Mar-2023
Hearing
Sub-Judge
-
07-Jan-2023
Hearing
Sub-Judge
-
19-Nov-2022
Hearing
Sub-Judge
-
20-Oct-2022
OrderView PDF
Case Summary Case: Civil Suit No. 625 of 2010, Sonapur Court (Assam) Outcome: The plaintiff's application dated 21-12-2021 seeking recall of the order dated 31-03-2021 (which closed plaintiff's evidence) has been dismissed. The court found the application misconceived and held that the plaintiff, despite 11 years having passed since the suit was filed, failed to present complete evidence. The defendant's witness cross-examination by plaintiff's counsel remains pending, and allowing the plaintiff to reopen evidence would be unjustified. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
20-Oct-2022
Hearing
Sub-Judge
-
23-Sep-2022
Hearing
Sub-Judge
-
08-Sep-2022
Hearing
Sub-Judge
-
11-Aug-2022
Hearing
Sub-Judge
-
19-Jul-2022
Hearing
Sub-Judge
-
18-Jun-2022
Rejoinder
Sub-Judge
-
21-May-2022
Rejoinder
Sub-Judge
-
15-Mar-2022
Rejoinder
Sub-Judge
-
21-Dec-2021
Evidence
Sub-Judge
-
22-Sep-2021
Evidence
Sub-Judge
-
23-Jun-2021
Evidence
Sub-Judge
-
31-Mar-2021
Evidence
Sub-Judge
-
27-Jan-2021
Evidence
Sub-Judge
-
11-Nov-2020
Evidence
Sub-Judge
-
27-Aug-2020
Evidence
Sub-Judge
-
18-Jun-2020
Evidence
Sub Judge II
-
14-May-2020
Evidence
Sub Judge II
-
12-Feb-2020
Evidence
-
10-Jan-2020
Evidence
-
22-Nov-2019
Order
Sub-Judge
-
18-Oct-2019
OrderView PDF
-
18-Oct-2019
Order
Sub-Judge
-
03-Sep-2019
Order
Sub-Judge
-
06-Aug-2019
Hearing
Sub-Judge
-
05-Jul-2019
Hearing
Sub-Judge
-
12-Jun-2019
Hearing
Sub-Judge
-
26-Apr-2019
Hearing
Sub-Judge
-
15-Mar-2019
Hearing
Sub-Judge
-
18-Jan-2019
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
05-Oct-2010
Case filed
Registration No. 625/2010
Case Summary Case: Civil Suit No. 625 of 2010, Sonapur Court (Assam) Outcome: The plaintiff's application dated 21-12-2021 seeking recall of the order dated 31-03-2021 (which closed plaintiff's evidence) has been dismissed. The court found the application misconceived and held that the plaintiff, despite 11 years having passed since the suit was filed, failed to present complete evidence. The defendant's witness cross-examination by plaintiff's counsel remains pending, and allowing the plaintiff to reopen evidence would be unjustified. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts