SHEKH SHAHID AND OTHER vs SHEKH BAHRAM AND OTHERS — 44/2021

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 9. Disposed: Uncontested--DISMISSED on 29th April 2026.

Partion Suit - TITLE PARTITION SUIT

CNR: BRWC220001462021

Case disposed

Filing Number

146/2021

Filing Date

10-09-2021

Registration No

44/2021

Registration Date

10-09-2021

Court

Narkatiaganj Civil Division

Judge

3-Sub -Judge- II-Cum A.C.J.M

Decision Date

29th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--DISMISSED

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 9

Petitioner(s)

SHEKH SHAHID AND OTHER

Adv. SHEO NARAIN PRASAD

SHEKH MAHID

Respondent(s)

SHEKH BAHRAM AND OTHERS

SHEKH SERAJ

SK SARFARAJ

BIBI RAUSHAN ARA

BIBI YUGNI ARA

SK AJMULLAH

MUNNI BEGUM

JHUNNI BEGUM

NOORJAHAN BEGUM

ASROON NESHA

SABROON NESHA

SHAHJAHAN BEGUM

ALIMUN KHATOON

JHALIMUN KHATOON

SHEKH HASMUDDIN

SHEKH RAJJAK

Adv. ASHWANI RAMAN

SHEKH SALLI

Hearing History

Judge: 3-Sub -Judge- II-Cum A.C.J.M

29-04-2026

Disposed

23-04-2026

JUDGEMENT

30-03-2026

ARGUMENTS

12-03-2026

ARGUMENTS

19-02-2026

ARGUMENTS

Final Orders / Judgements

29-04-2026
Judgment

Case Summary: 44/2021 The court dismissed the plaintiffs' suit for partition of disputed agricultural land totaling 1 bigha 11 kattha 5 dhur located in Moza-Barwa, Bihar. The judge found that the plaintiffs failed to establish joint ownership and possession of the land among all parties, as they could not adequately prove their claims through documentary evidence (particularly regarding property acquired by one co-owner through separate purchase) and could not make necessary co-owners parties to the suit. The case was dismissed as defective for want of proper parties and insufficient proof of claims. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 44/2021 The court dismissed the plaintiffs' suit for partition of disputed agricultural land totaling 1 bigha 11 kattha 5 dhur located in Moza-Barwa, Bihar. The judge found that the plaintiffs failed to establish joint ownership and possession of the land among all parties, as they could not adequately prove their claims through documentary evidence (particularly regarding property acquired by one co-owner through separate purchase) and could not make necessary co-owners parties to the suit. The case was dismissed as defective for want of proper parties and insufficient proof of claims. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Narkatiaganj Civil Division All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case