MANIBEN GORDHANBHAI GOHIL(Legal Heir) vs CHETAN VANKESAR NIZAMA Advocate - D.G.SOLANKI — 33/2017
Case under Specific Relief Act, 1963 Section 31,37. Status: PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE. Next hearing: 15th June 2026.
RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT
CNR: GJBH050010022017
Next Hearing
15th June 2026
Filing Number
33/2017
Filing Date
11-10-2017
Registration No
33/2017
Registration Date
11-10-2017
Court
TALUKA COURT, VAGRA
Judge
1-ADDI CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
MANIBEN GORDHANBHAI GOHIL(Legal Heir)
Adv. J.H.KADRI1.
Nimeshbhai Udesangbhai Gohil 1.
Rayjibhai Gordhanbhai Gohil 1.
Dalpatbhai Gordhanbhai Gohil 1.
Kankuben Gordhanbhai Gohil 1.
Kamlaben Gordhanbhai Gohil 1.
Laxmiben Gordhanbhai Gohil
Respondent(s)
CHETAN VANKESAR NIZAMA Advocate - D.G.SOLANKI
SHITALBEN RAJENDRABHAI MAJMUDAR
VANKESAR MAGANBHAI NIZAMA
Hearing History
Judge: 1-ADDI CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 11-05-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE |
| 13-04-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE |
| 16-03-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE |
| 23-02-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE |
| 02-02-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: RCS 33/2017 The plaintiff sought interim injunction to void a registered sale deed for agricultural property in Bharuch district, claiming defendants paid only Rs. 2,00,000 of the agreed Rs. 13,74,800 consideration. The court rejected the application, finding the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case. Bank statements proved defendants paid Rs. 4,98,000 through cheques that the plaintiff deposited, contradicting her claim of non-payment. The court held the registered deed carries presumption of genuineness and found plaintiff's conduct inequitable for concealing receipt of funds. Costs awarded against the plaintiff. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: RCS 33/2017 The plaintiff sought interim injunction to void a registered sale deed for agricultural property in Bharuch district, claiming defendants paid only Rs. 2,00,000 of the agreed Rs. 13,74,800 consideration. The court rejected the application, finding the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case. Bank statements proved defendants paid Rs. 4,98,000 through cheques that the plaintiff deposited, contradicting her claim of non-payment. The court held the registered deed carries presumption of genuineness and found plaintiff's conduct inequitable for concealing receipt of funds. Costs awarded against the plaintiff. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts