PRAJAPATI MAFABHAI PUNABHAI vs PRAJAPATI HARGOVANBHAI AJABHAI Advocate - R K MANSURI — 27/2015

Case under Specific Relief Act, 1963 Section 034,038,. Status: FINAL ARGUMENTS. Next hearing: 27th April 2026.

RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT

CNR: GJBK160010532015

FINAL ARGUMENTS

Next Hearing

27th April 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

27/2015

Filing Date

10-12-2015

Registration No

27/2015

Registration Date

10-12-2015

Court

TALUKA COURT, SIHORI

Judge

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

Acts & Sections

SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT, 1963 Section 034,038,

Petitioner(s)

PRAJAPATI MAFABHAI PUNABHAI

Adv. M C PARMAR

PRAJAPATI HARGOVANBHAI PUNABHAI

Adv. M C PARMAR

PRAJAPATI TRIBHOVABHAI PUNABHAI

Adv. M C PARMAR

Respondent(s)

PRAJAPATI HARGOVANBHAI AJABHAI Advocate - R K MANSURI

PRAJAPATI JESANGBHAI AJABHAI

Adv. J R SUMRA

PRAJAPATI CHAMANBHAI AJABHAI

PRAJAPATI MANABHAI AJABHAI

PRAJAPATI SAGRAMBHAI HARIBHAI

PRAJAPATI DASARATHBHAI JIVANBHAI

PRAJAPATI VIJYABEN JIVANBHAI

PRAJAPATI RAMESHBHAI BABABHAI

PRAJAPATI JAYANTIBHAI BABABHAI

PRAJAPATI NARMADABEN BABABHAI

PRAJAPATI VALIBEN BABABHAI

PRAJAPATI SHAMBHUBHAI JOITABHAI

Hearing History

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

06-04-2026

FINAL ARGUMENTS

09-03-2026

FINAL ARGUMENTS

16-02-2026

FINAL ARGUMENTS

12-01-2026

FINAL ARGUMENTS

22-12-2025

ISSUES

Interim Orders

14-08-2018
ORDER

Court Order Summary Case: Revenue Dispute Petition No. 27/15 | Court: Principal Civil Court, Sihor Outcome: Both petitions dismissed—the plaintiffs' interim relief plea (Mark 5) and the defendants' counter-claim interim relief plea (Mark 17) are rejected. The court found insufficient grounds to grant interim injunctions to either party, as the case involves disputed revenue records with ongoing parallel proceedings that must be resolved on their merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Order Summary Case: Revenue Dispute Petition No. 27/15 | Court: Principal Civil Court, Sihor Outcome: Both petitions dismissed—the plaintiffs' interim relief plea (Mark 5) and the defendants' counter-claim interim relief plea (Mark 17) are rejected. The court found insufficient grounds to grant interim injunctions to either party, as the case involves disputed revenue records with ongoing parallel proceedings that must be resolved on their merits. 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, SIHORI All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case