PUNAMJI GORDHANJI THAKOR vs BHIKHAJI VAGHAJI THAKOR Advocate - P N VYAS — 145/2023

Case under Specific Relief Act, 1963 Section 38,34,. Status: PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE. Next hearing: 15th June 2026.

RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT

CNR: GJGN030018242023

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

Next Hearing

15th June 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

145/2023

Filing Date

05-08-2023

Registration No

145/2023

Registration Date

05-08-2023

Court

TALUKA COURT, DEHGAM

Judge

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

Acts & Sections

SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT, 1963 Section 38,34,
IA/1/2024 Classification : INTERIM APPLICATION Section PUNAMJI GORDHANJI THAKORBHIKHAJI VAGHAJI THAKOR

Petitioner(s)

PUNAMJI GORDHANJI THAKOR

Adv. J J SHAH

ALKABEN GORDHANJI THAKOR

Adv. J J SHAH

Respondent(s)

BHIKHAJI VAGHAJI THAKOR Advocate - P N VYAS

Hearing History

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

06-04-2026

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

09-03-2026

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

19-01-2026

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

08-12-2025

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

13-10-2025

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

Interim Orders

09-01-2024
ORDER

Summary The petition was dismissed. The court held that the plaintiffs failed to establish their case for the relief sought regarding agricultural land ownership shares and the validity of a registered Release Deed. The court found the registered deed presumptively genuine under Indian law and rejected the plaintiffs' arguments based on lack of proper evidence and conflicting claims. The court also dismissed their prayers for monetary compensation and other reliefs, finding them legally untenable. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The petition was dismissed. The court held that the plaintiffs failed to establish their case for the relief sought regarding agricultural land ownership shares and the validity of a registered Release Deed. The court found the registered deed presumptively genuine under Indian law and rejected the plaintiffs' arguments based on lack of proper evidence and conflicting claims. The court also dismissed their prayers for monetary compensation and other reliefs, finding them legally untenable. 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, DEHGAM All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case