Sultankhan Faijmahammad Pawar (Pathan)(Legal Heir) vs Heir of Late Fatukhan Mohammadkhan - Sokatkhan Fatukhan Shaikh Advocate - G.B.MODI — 161/2018
Case under Gujarat (bombay) Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 Section 13. Status: REPLY. Next hearing: 08th June 2026.
SMCST - SMALL CAUSE SUIT
CNR: GJAH030012322018
Next Hearing
08th June 2026
Filing Number
161/2018
Filing Date
08-05-2018
Registration No
161/2018
Registration Date
08-05-2018
Court
SMALL CAUSE COURT, AHMEDABAD
Judge
5-JUDGE, SMALL CAUSE COURT
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Sultankhan Faijmahammad Pawar (Pathan)(Legal Heir)
Adv. J.N.AHMEDI1.
Salman Sultankhan
Adv. J N AHMEDI1.
Batulbibi W/o. Sultankhan Faijmahammad Pawar
Adv. J N AHMEDI
Salmankhan Sultankhan Pawar (Pathan)
Adv. J.N.AHMEDI
Respondent(s)
Heir of Late Fatukhan Mohammadkhan - Sokatkhan Fatukhan Shaikh Advocate - G.B.MODI
Nisharahemad Fatukhan Shaikh - Heir of Late Fatukhan Mohammadkhan
Akhatarhusen Fatukhan Shaikh - Heir of Late Fatukhan Mohammadkhan
Rajiyabanu Mustakalikhan
Hearing History
Judge: 5-JUDGE, SMALL CAUSE COURT
REPLY
REPLY
REPLY
REPLY
REPLY
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 09-04-2026 | REPLY |
| 11-03-2026 | REPLY |
| 16-02-2026 | REPLY |
| 16-01-2026 | REPLY |
| 06-01-2026 | REPLY |
Interim Orders
Court Order Summary The petition filed by the plaintiff (writ petition/appeal) seeking possession of a disputed property and recovery of pending rent payments is partially allowed. The court ordered that the plaintiff's right to possession of the property (which was initially given to Defendant No. 1) be recognized, and that the status quo of the property be maintained until final judgment in the case. The court also directed that both parties bear their own litigation costs and that the property's existing condition be preserved pending final resolution of the dispute. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Order Summary The petition filed by the plaintiff (writ petition/appeal) seeking possession of a disputed property and recovery of pending rent payments is partially allowed. The court ordered that the plaintiff's right to possession of the property (which was initially given to Defendant No. 1) be recognized, and that the status quo of the property be maintained until final judgment in the case. The court also directed that both parties bear their own litigation costs and that the property's existing condition be preserved pending final resolution of the dispute. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts