HASSANBHAI HABIBBHAI JAT vs BHARUCH DISTRICT FOREST DEP. Advocate - P.N.PARMAR — 56/2019

Case under Specific Relief Act, 1963 Section 034,038. Disposed: Contested--JUDGEMENT on 21st April 2026.

Case disposed

RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT

CNR: GJBH050018222019

Filing Number

56/2019

Filing Date

05-Apr-2006

Registration No

56/2019

Registration Date

05-Apr-2006

Court

TALUKA COURT, VAGRA

Judge

2-Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

Decision Date

21-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGEMENT

Last updated 12-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Specific Relief Act, 1963 Section 034,038

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.HASSANBHAI HABIBBHAI JAT

    Adv. A T PANWALA

  2. 2.HUSSAINBHAI MUSABHAI JAT

    Adv. A T PANWALA

  3. 3.USAMANBHAI ABDUL REHMAN JAT

    Adv. A T PANWALA

  4. 4.UMARBHAI KARIMBHAI JAT

    Adv. A T PANWALA

  5. 5.IBHRAHIMBHAI HABIBBHAI JAT

    Adv. A T PANWALA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.BHARUCH DISTRICT FOREST DEP. Advocate - P.N.PARMAR

  2. 2.COLLECTORATE OF BHARUCH

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 21-Apr-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Case Summary: R.C.S. No. 56/2019 Court Decision: The Principal Senior Civil Judge, Vagra (Bharuch) dismissed the plaintiffs' suit, finding they failed to prove legal ownership or rights to the disputed land. The court held that the land is validly declared as reserved forest under government notifications and that the plaintiffs' possession cannot override statutory forest protection. Key Reasoning: The court found that although the plaintiffs demonstrated habitation and community presence at Aliabet, they failed to establish: (1) continuous residence exceeding 60 years; (2) that the land is not reserved forest; (3) ownership through adverse possession; or (4) exclusion of their land from forest reserve. The court applied the Indian Forest Act 1927, Forest Conservation Act 1980, and Supreme Court precedent (T.N. Godavarman v. Union of India), concluding that encroachment on forest land cannot ripen into ownership and plaintiffs' tax payments acknowledged government ownership rather than hostile possession. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 21-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  4. 20-Apr-2026

    Judgement

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  5. 06-Apr-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  6. 23-Mar-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  7. 16-Mar-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  8. 02-Mar-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  9. 23-Feb-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  10. 02-Feb-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  11. 12-Jan-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  12. 06-Dec-2025

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  13. 24-Nov-2025

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  14. 27-Oct-2025

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  15. 08-Sep-2025

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  16. 18-Aug-2025

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  17. 28-Jul-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  18. 21-Jul-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  19. 24-Jun-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  20. 12-Jun-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  21. 02-Jun-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  22. 20-May-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  23. 22-Apr-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  24. 24-Mar-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  25. 24-Feb-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  26. 17-Feb-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  27. 27-Jan-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  28. 06-Jan-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  29. 16-Dec-2024

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  30. 18-Nov-2024

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  31. 28-Oct-2024

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  32. 30-Sep-2024

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  33. 20-Aug-2024

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  34. 16-Jul-2024

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  35. 10-Jun-2024

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  36. 22-Apr-2024

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  37. 04-Mar-2024

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  38. 05-Feb-2024

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  39. 18-Dec-2023

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  40. 06-Nov-2023

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  41. 26-Sep-2023

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  42. 14-Aug-2023

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  43. 03-Jul-2023

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  44. 05-Jun-2023

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  45. 01-May-2023

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  46. 27-Mar-2023

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  47. 20-Feb-2023

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  48. 30-Jan-2023

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  49. 26-Dec-2022

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  50. 21-Nov-2022

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  51. 26-Sep-2022

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  52. 22-Aug-2022

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  53. 01-Aug-2022

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  54. 20-Jun-2022

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  55. 04-Apr-2022

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  56. 14-Feb-2022

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  57. 13-Dec-2021

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  58. 15-Nov-2021

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  59. 06-Sep-2021

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  60. 29-Jun-2021

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  61. 23-Mar-2021

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  62. 11-Jan-2021

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  63. 09-Nov-2020

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  64. 14-Sep-2020

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  65. 27-Jul-2020

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  66. 08-Jun-2020

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  67. 23-Mar-2020

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  68. 21-Jan-2020

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  69. 05-Apr-2006

    Case filed

    Registration No. 56/2019

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: R.C.S. No. 56/2019 Court Decision: The Principal Senior Civil Judge, Vagra (Bharuch) dismissed the plaintiffs' suit, finding they failed to prove legal ownership or rights to the disputed land. The court held that the land is validly declared as reserved forest under government notifications and that the plaintiffs' possession cannot override statutory forest protection. Key Reasoning: The court found that although the plaintiffs demonstrated habitation and community presence at Aliabet, they failed to establish: (1) continuous residence exceeding 60 years; (2) that the land is not reserved forest; (3) ownership through adverse possession; or (4) exclusion of their land from forest reserve. The court applied the Indian Forest Act 1927, Forest Conservation Act 1980, and Supreme Court precedent (T.N. Godavarman v. Union of India), concluding that encroachment on forest land cannot ripen into ownership and plaintiffs' tax payments acknowledged government ownership rather than hostile possession. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case