RAJENDRASINH RAMJIBHAI GOHIL vs KASHIBEN DEVJIBHAI PARMAR Advocate - A F CHAUHAN — 69/2025
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: GJBH090010992025
Next Hearing
20th June 2026
Filing Number
69/2025
Filing Date
03-09-2025
Registration No
69/2025
Registration Date
03-09-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, VALIA
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Acts & Sections
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
HEARING ON INJUNCTION APPLICATION
WRITTEN STATEMENT/REPLY
WRITTEN STATEMENT/REPLY
WRITTEN STATEMENT/REPLY
WRITTEN STATEMENT/REPLY
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 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
Case Summary: 69/2025 Outcome: Respondent 1's pleas in amendments 15 and 16 are dismissed; no costs awarded. Key Issue: This case involves a dispute over joint ancestral agricultural property among co-heirs. Petitioners challenged the sale deed executed by Respondent 1 (through Respondent 2) on grounds that it violated the Fragmentation of Agricultural Land Act, 1947, and that the sale deed was illegal and void as it was made without proper partition of the joint property and without consent of all co-owners. The court found the sale deed was executed illegally and the transfer violated land consolidation laws. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: 69/2025 Outcome: Respondent 1's pleas in amendments 15 and 16 are dismissed; no costs awarded. Key Issue: This case involves a dispute over joint ancestral agricultural property among co-heirs. Petitioners challenged the sale deed executed by Respondent 1 (through Respondent 2) on grounds that it violated the Fragmentation of Agricultural Land Act, 1947, and that the sale deed was illegal and void as it was made without proper partition of the joint property and without consent of all co-owners. The court found the sale deed was executed illegally and the transfer violated land consolidation laws. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts