JYANTIBHAI MANUBHAI VALAND vs LEGAL HEIRS OF VIJIBEN DAUGHTER OF SHAKRABHAI AND WIFE OF SHANKARBHAI MANGALDAS VALAND Advocate - M I BRAHMBHATT — 30/2022

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 96. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 13th March 2026.

Case disposed

RCA - REGULAR CIVIL APPEAL

CNR: GJAH010026002022

Filing Number

30/2022

Filing Date

05-May-2022

Registration No

30/2022

Registration Date

05-May-2022

Court

Ahmedabad District

Judge

4-9th Addl District Judge

Decision Date

13-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 31-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 96

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.JYANTIBHAI MANUBHAI VALAND

    Adv. Y B PANDIT

  2. 2.RANJANBEN MANUBHAI VALAND

  3. 3.BHAGVATIBEN MANUBHAI VALAND

  4. 4.INDUBEN MANUBHAI VALAND

  5. 5.USHABEN MANUBHAI VALAND

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.LEGAL HEIRS OF VIJIBEN DAUGHTER OF SHAKRABHAI AND WIFE OF SHANKARBHAI MANGALDAS VALAND Advocate - M I BRAHMBHATT

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 13-Mar-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Case Summary: RCA No. 30/2022 Court Decision: The appellate court dismissed the appeal and confirmed the trial court's judgment, declaring that the respondents (legal heirs of Vijiben) hold a 1/2 share in the disputed agricultural property as undivided ancestral property. The court rejected defendants' claims that respondents had relinquished their rights, finding unregistered relinquishment documents inadmissible under the Registration Act. The judgment upheld respondents' inheritance rights under the Hindu Succession Amendment Act, 2005. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 13-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    9th Addl District Judge

  4. 12-Mar-2026

    Judgement

    9th Addl District Judge

  5. 23-Feb-2026

    Judgement

    9th Addl District Judge

  6. 13-Feb-2026

    Final Hearing

    9th Addl District Judge

  7. 06-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    9th Addl District Judge

  8. 30-Jan-2026

    Hearing

    9th Addl District Judge

  9. 23-Jan-2026

    Hearing

    9th Addl District Judge

  10. 09-Jan-2026

    Hearing

    9th Addl District Judge

  11. 20-Dec-2025

    Hearing

    10th Addl District Judge

  12. 15-Nov-2025

    Hearing

    10th Addl District Judge

  13. 04-Oct-2025

    Hearing

    10th Addl District Judge

  14. 30-Aug-2025

    Hearing

    10th Addl District Judge

  15. 30-Jul-2025

    Hearing

    10th Addl District Judge

  16. 11-Jul-2025

    Hearing

    10th Addl District Judge

  17. 27-Jun-2025

    Hearing

    10th Addl District Judge

  18. 03-May-2025

    Hearing

    3rd Addl District Judge

  19. 04-Apr-2025

    Hearing

    3rd Addl District Judge

  20. 01-Mar-2025

    Hearing

    3rd Addl District Judge

  21. 03-Jan-2025

    For R&P

    3rd Addl District Judge

  22. 18-Nov-2024

    For R&P

    3rd Addl District Judge

  23. 13-Sep-2024

    For R&P

    3rd Addl District Judge

  24. 29-Jul-2024

    For R&P

    3rd Addl District Judge

  25. 07-May-2024

    For R&P

    6th Addl District Judge

  26. 22-Feb-2024

    For R&P

    6th Addl District Judge

  27. 02-Dec-2023

    For R&P

    6th Addl District Judge

  28. 08-Sep-2023

    Hearing

    6th Addl District Judge

  29. 23-Jun-2023

    Service Of Process

    6th Addl District Judge

  30. 31-Mar-2023

    Service Of Process

    5th Addl District Judge

  31. 06-Jan-2023

    Service Of Process

    6th Addl District Judge

  32. 29-Nov-2022

    Service Of Process

    6th Addl District Judge

  33. 12-Sep-2022

    Service Of Process

    6th Addl District Judge

  34. 14-Jun-2022

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  35. 05-May-2022

    Case filed

    Registration No. 30/2022

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: RCA No. 30/2022 Court Decision: The appellate court dismissed the appeal and confirmed the trial court's judgment, declaring that the respondents (legal heirs of Vijiben) hold a 1/2 share in the disputed agricultural property as undivided ancestral property. The court rejected defendants' claims that respondents had relinquished their rights, finding unregistered relinquishment documents inadmissible under the Registration Act. The judgment upheld respondents' inheritance rights under the Hindu Succession Amendment Act, 2005. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case