RAJENDRASINH RAMJIBHAI GOHIL vs KASHIBEN DEVJIBHAI PARMAR Advocate - A F CHAUHAN — 66/2025

Case under Specific Relief Act, 1963 Section 31,34,38. Status: HEARING ON INJUNCTION APPLICATION. Next hearing: 20th June 2026.

RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT

CNR: GJBH090010952025

HEARING ON INJUNCTION APPLICATION

Next Hearing

20th June 2026

Filing Number

66/2025

Filing Date

03-09-2025

Registration No

66/2025

Registration Date

03-09-2025

Court

TALUKA COURT, VALIA

Judge

1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

Acts & Sections

SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT, 1963 Section 31,34,38

Petitioner(s)

RAJENDRASINH RAMJIBHAI GOHIL

Adv. C N JADAV

RANJITSINH RAMJIBHAI JIRAWALA

Adv. C N JADAV

LALITABEN DHIRAJBHAI PARMAR

Adv. C N JADAV

BAKULBHAI DHIRAJBHAI AGRAWAL

Adv. C N JADAV

FALGUNI DHIRAJBHAI AGRAWAL

Adv. C N JADAV

HARISHBHAI UMEDBHAI HANSOTI

Adv. C N JADAV

DHARMISTHABEN MANJIBHAI PARMAR

Adv. C N JADAV

CHETANKUMAR MANJIBHAI PARMAR

Adv. C N JADAV

Respondent(s)

KASHIBEN DEVJIBHAI PARMAR Advocate - A F CHAUHAN

JAYANTIBHAI BACHUBHAI VADDORIYA

Adv. G M SHAH

Hearing History

Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

07-05-2026

HEARING ON INJUNCTION APPLICATION

18-04-2026

WRITTEN STATEMENT/REPLY

17-04-2026

WRITTEN STATEMENT/REPLY

03-04-2026

WRITTEN STATEMENT/REPLY

30-03-2026

WRITTEN STATEMENT/REPLY

Interim Orders

30-03-2026
ORDER
30-03-2026
ORDER
30-03-2026
ORDER
30-03-2026
ORDER

Case Summary: 66/2025 Case: Civil Suit No. 66/2025 Petitioners: Rajendrasinh Ramjibhai Gohil, Ranjitsinh Ramjibhai Jirawala, and Lalitaben Dhirajbhai Parmar Respondents: Kashiben Devjibhai Parmar (Advocate A.F. Chauhan and Jayantibhai Bachubhai Vaddoriya) Outcome: The court allowed petitioners' appeals (Sections 15 and 16) against respondent Number 1's decisions. The court found that respondent Number 1 improperly registered agricultural land (involving partition and sale deed) without proper authority and in violation of applicable land partition laws. The court determined that respondent Number 1's sale deed creating separate partition shares violated the Fragmentation of Land Holdings Act and was legally defective. No costs awarded. Order Date: March 30, 2026 This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 66/2025 Case: Civil Suit No. 66/2025 Petitioners: Rajendrasinh Ramjibhai Gohil, Ranjitsinh Ramjibhai Jirawala, and Lalitaben Dhirajbhai Parmar Respondents: Kashiben Devjibhai Parmar (Advocate A.F. Chauhan and Jayantibhai Bachubhai Vaddoriya) Outcome: The court allowed petitioners' appeals (Sections 15 and 16) against respondent Number 1's decisions. The court found that respondent Number 1 improperly registered agricultural land (involving partition and sale deed) without proper authority and in violation of applicable land partition laws. The court determined that respondent Number 1's sale deed creating separate partition shares violated the Fragmentation of Land Holdings Act and was legally defective. No costs awarded. Order Date: March 30, 2026 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, VALIA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case