AMRISH KUMAR vs KIRAN YADAV — 320/2025
Case under Permanent Injuction Section ORDERIV. Status: Misc. cases/purpose. Next hearing: 22nd August 2026.
CS DJ ADJ - CIVIL SUIT FOR DJ ADJ
CNR: DLSW010027702025
e-Filing Number
28-03-2025
Filing Number
1347/2025
Filing Date
29-Mar-2025
Registration No
320/2025
Registration Date
01-Apr-2025
Court
District and Session Judge, South-West DWK
Judge
424-District Judge
Last updated 10-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.AMRISH KUMAR
Adv. SANTOSH KUMAR
Respondent(s)
-
1.KIRAN YADAV
-
2.FANISH SHAH
Case History
-
22-Aug-2026
Next hearingPending
-
29-May-2026
Misc. cases/purpose
District Judge
-
15-Mar-2026
Misc. cases/purpose
District Judge
-
24-Jan-2026
Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF
Summary: Amrish Kumar v. Kiran Yadav (Case 320/2025) Outcome: The court dismissed Defendant No. 1's application to reject the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC on grounds of lack of cause of action, jurisdictional bar under the Family Courts Act, and limitation. The court also allowed the plaintiff's application under Order VI Rule 17 CPC to amend the plaint's valuation and relief clauses. The case involves a property dispute where the plaintiff (husband) challenges a gift deed executed to his wife, claiming it was a sham arrangement under a family settlement among three brothers to inherit their deceased father's property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
24-Jan-2026
Misc. cases/purpose
District Judge
-
27-Sep-2025
Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF
-
27-Sep-2025
Misc. cases/purpose
District Judge
-
05-Jul-2025
Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF
-
05-Jul-2025
Misc. Arguments
District Judge
-
01-Apr-2025
Copy Of Judicial ProceedingsView PDF
-
01-Apr-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
29-Mar-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 320/2025
Summary: Amrish Kumar v. Kiran Yadav (Case 320/2025) Outcome: The court dismissed Defendant No. 1's application to reject the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC on grounds of lack of cause of action, jurisdictional bar under the Family Courts Act, and limitation. The court also allowed the plaintiff's application under Order VI Rule 17 CPC to amend the plaint's valuation and relief clauses. The case involves a property dispute where the plaintiff (husband) challenges a gift deed executed to his wife, claiming it was a sham arrangement under a family settlement among three brothers to inherit their deceased father's property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts