RAJENDRABHAI SUKHLALBHAI VAGHELA vs MAHMAD RAFIK RAHIMBHAI HASMANI — 336/2024
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 38,34. Status: Plaintiff Evidence. Next hearing: 22nd June 2026.
RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT
CNR: GJBT030035172024
Filing Number
336/2024
Filing Date
15-Oct-2024
Registration No
336/2024
Registration Date
15-Oct-2024
Court
TALUKA COURT, GADHADA
Judge
1-Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
Last updated 11-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.RAJENDRABHAI SUKHLALBHAI VAGHELA
Adv. D P SAU
-
2.DINESHBHAI SUKHLALBHAI VAGHELA
Adv. D P SAU
-
3.JIVRAJBHAI LALJIBHAI JAMOD
Adv. D P SAU
-
4.KALUBHAI LALJIBHAI JAMOD
Adv. D P SAU
Respondent(s)
-
1.MAHMAD RAFIK RAHIMBHAI HASMANI
-
2.ANIRUDDHBHAI MANHARBHAI SHEKHVA
Adv. V K SODHATAR
Case History
-
22-Jun-2026
Next hearingPending
-
28-Apr-2026
Plaintiff Evidence
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
15-Apr-2026
Plaintiff Evidence
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
01-Apr-2026
Plaintiff Evidence
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
24-Mar-2026
Plaintiff Evidence
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
16-Mar-2026
Plaintiff Evidence
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
23-Feb-2026
Plaintiff Evidence
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
28-Jan-2026
OrderView PDF
Case Summary: Regular Civil Suit No. 336 of 2024 Outcome: Interim injunction application partly allowed. The court granted the plaintiffs' request for temporary injunction against the defendants. The court directed that defendants cannot obstruct the plaintiffs' possession of rented shops at Gadhada Tower Chowk, and ordered Defendant No. 2 to immediately unlock the common road/way attached to the shops and refrain from locking it until the suit's disposal. The court found all three legal requirements satisfied: the plaintiffs established a prima facie case of tenancy with rights to the access way (evidenced by sale deed); balance of convenience favored the plaintiffs whose business depends on road access; and denial would cause irreparable injury. No costs ordered. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
28-Jan-2026
Plaintiff Evidence
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
13-Jan-2026
Order On Injuction Application
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
29-Dec-2025
Hearing On Injunction Application
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
10-Dec-2025
Hearing On Injunction Application
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
04-Nov-2025
Hearing On Injunction Application
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
13-Oct-2025
Hearing On Injunction Application
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
30-Sep-2025
Hearing On Injunction Application
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
15-Sep-2025
Hearing On Injunction Application
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
26-Aug-2025
Hearing On Injunction Application
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
30-Jul-2025
Hearing On Injunction Application
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
17-Jul-2025
Hearing On Injunction Application
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
19-Jun-2025
Hearing On Injunction Application
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
13-May-2025
Hearing On Injunction Application
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
30-Apr-2025
Hearing On Injunction Application
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
15-Apr-2025
Hearing On Injunction Application
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
11-Apr-2025
Written Statement/Reply
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
26-Mar-2025
Written Statement/Reply
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
01-Feb-2025
Summons - Notice
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
01-Jan-2025
Summons - Notice
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
21-Nov-2024
Summons - Notice
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
18-Nov-2024
Summons - Notice
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
16-Nov-2024
Summons - Notice
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
08-Nov-2024
Summons - Notice
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
28-Oct-2024
Summons - Notice
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
21-Oct-2024
Summons - Notice
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
15-Oct-2024
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
15-Oct-2024
Case filed
Registration No. 336/2024
Case Summary: Regular Civil Suit No. 336 of 2024 Outcome: Interim injunction application partly allowed. The court granted the plaintiffs' request for temporary injunction against the defendants. The court directed that defendants cannot obstruct the plaintiffs' possession of rented shops at Gadhada Tower Chowk, and ordered Defendant No. 2 to immediately unlock the common road/way attached to the shops and refrain from locking it until the suit's disposal. The court found all three legal requirements satisfied: the plaintiffs established a prima facie case of tenancy with rights to the access way (evidenced by sale deed); balance of convenience favored the plaintiffs whose business depends on road access; and denial would cause irreparable injury. No costs ordered. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts