DHAVAL MANUBHAI JADAV vs HARJIBHAI GANGARAM Advocate - EX PARTY — 50/2025

Case under Specific Relief Act, 1963 Section 34,38. Status: ISSUES. Next hearing: 16th June 2026.

SPCS - SPECIAL CIVIL SUIT

CNR: GJAH090014982025

ISSUES

Next Hearing

16th June 2026

Filing Number

50/2025

Filing Date

09-05-2025

Registration No

50/2025

Registration Date

09-05-2025

Court

TALUKA COURT, SANAND

Judge

1-ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & CJM

Acts & Sections

SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT, 1963 Section 34,38
IA/1/2025 Classification : INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION Section DHAVAL MANUBHAI JADAVHARJIBHAI GANGARAM

Petitioner(s)

DHAVAL MANUBHAI JADAV

Adv. J K CHOKSHI

Respondent(s)

HARJIBHAI GANGARAM Advocate - EX PARTY

MANSUKHBHAI GANGARAM

Adv. EX PARTY

SHAKRIBEN GANGARAM

Adv. EX PARTY

KANIBEN WIFE OF GANGARAM SAGARBHAI KO PATEL

Adv. EX PARTY

LABHUBEN GANGARAM

Adv. EX PARTY

BALDEVBHAI RUPSANG

Adv. EX PARTY

LEGAL HEIRS OF LATE KRUSHNA RUPSANG(Legal Heir)

Adv. EX PARTY

BHAYRAMBHAI ALIAS BHAILALBHAI DHARSHIBHAI

Adv. EX PARTY

GANIBEN ALIAS JENIBEN DHARSHIBHAI WIFE OF VISHNUBHAI SOLANKI

Adv. EX PARTY

GHANSHYAMBHAI DHARSHIBHAI

Adv. EX PARTY

MINOR SAMIRBHAI BHARATBHAI HIS PARENT GHANSHYAMBHAI DHARSHIBHAI

Adv. EX PARTY

AADISH MAHAVIRPRASAD JAIN

Adv. EX PARTY

Hearing History

Judge: 1-ADDITIONAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & CJM

15-04-2026

ISSUES

11-03-2026

ISSUES

02-02-2026

ISSUES

03-01-2026

SUMMONS - NOTICE

24-12-2025

SUMMONS - NOTICE

Interim Orders

02-02-2026
ORDER

Summary: The court rejected the plaintiff's application for temporary injunction seeking to restrain defendants from alienating agricultural land in Ahmedabad pending a specific performance suit based on an alleged oral agreement to sell. Although the court found a triable case existed with some risk of alienation, it held that the cumulative ingredients for granting temporary injunction were not satisfied, citing the oral and conditional nature of the alleged agreement, absence of written contract for the main transaction, lack of possession or part performance by plaintiff, and the adequate protection afforded by the doctrine of lis pendens under the Transfer of Property Act. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The court rejected the plaintiff's application for temporary injunction seeking to restrain defendants from alienating agricultural land in Ahmedabad pending a specific performance suit based on an alleged oral agreement to sell. Although the court found a triable case existed with some risk of alienation, it held that the cumulative ingredients for granting temporary injunction were not satisfied, citing the oral and conditional nature of the alleged agreement, absence of written contract for the main transaction, lack of possession or part performance by plaintiff, and the adequate protection afforded by the doctrine of lis pendens under the Transfer of Property Act. 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

TALUKA COURT, SANAND All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case