RAJENDRASINH RAMJIBHAI GOHIL vs KASHIBEN DEVJIBHAI PARMAR Advocate - A F CHAUHAN — 70/2025

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: GJBH090011002025

HEARING ON INJUNCTION APPLICATION

Next Hearing

20th June 2026

Filing Number

70/2025

Filing Date

03-09-2025

Registration No

70/2025

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

Case Summary: 70/2025 Outcome: The Court partially allowed the petitioners' petition. Respondent 1's (Kashiben Devjibhai Parmar's) interim applications in Sections 15 and 16 were approved, while no costs were awarded. Key Issue: The case involved a dispute over jointly-held agricultural land (village Tavaliya, Jhalod taluka, North Gujarat) between the petitioners and Respondent 1. The primary contention was whether Respondent 1 unilaterally could sell her share of the property to Respondent 2 without consent of co-owners, and whether the registered sale deed was legally valid under the Fragmented Landholdings Act, 1947. Court's Finding: The Court found that Respondent 1 acted improperly by executing a sale deed to Respondent 2 for her share without proper legal authorization and without the agreement of the joint owners. The sale deed was found to be legally defective and against statutory provisions governing agricultural land transfers. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 70/2025 Outcome: The Court partially allowed the petitioners' petition. Respondent 1's (Kashiben Devjibhai Parmar's) interim applications in Sections 15 and 16 were approved, while no costs were awarded. Key Issue: The case involved a dispute over jointly-held agricultural land (village Tavaliya, Jhalod taluka, North Gujarat) between the petitioners and Respondent 1. The primary contention was whether Respondent 1 unilaterally could sell her share of the property to Respondent 2 without consent of co-owners, and whether the registered sale deed was legally valid under the Fragmented Landholdings Act, 1947. Court's Finding: The Court found that Respondent 1 acted improperly by executing a sale deed to Respondent 2 for her share without proper legal authorization and without the agreement of the joint owners. The sale deed was found to be legally defective and against statutory provisions governing agricultural land transfers. 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