DAUDBHAI ALIBHAI AJMERI vs AJMERI HASINABEN DINMAHAMMAD Advocate - M.R.BHATT — 119/2019

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 19. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 20th March 2026.

Case disposed

RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT

CNR: GJGN040012342019

Filing Number

119/2019

Filing Date

19-Jul-2019

Registration No

119/2019

Registration Date

19-Jul-2019

Court

TALUKA COURT, MANSA

Judge

3-Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

Decision Date

20-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

Last updated 19-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 19

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.DAUDBHAI ALIBHAI AJMERI

    Adv. M J CHAUDHARY

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.AJMERI HASINABEN DINMAHAMMAD Advocate - M.R.BHATT

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 20-Mar-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Case Summary: R.C.S. 119/2019 Court: Principal Civil Judge, Mansa Duration: 6 years, 4 months, 7 days (Registered: 13/11/2019 | Decided: 20/03/2026) Decision The court dismissed the plaintiff's suit seeking ₹50,000 in damages for alleged malicious prosecution. The court found the plaintiff failed to prove essential elements of malicious prosecution—specifically, that the defendant filed a false complaint without reasonable cause and with malicious intent. Key Facts The plaintiff claimed the defendant lodged a false police complaint on 07/09/2018 alleging an altercation during unauthorized construction, causing him legal harassment and business loss. The plaintiff argued the defendant was on duty at Itadara and could not have witnessed the incident. Court's Reasoning The court accepted the defendant's credible narrative that she returned home mid-day upon learning of a neighborhood death, was present during the altercation, and filed the complaint in good faith. The court found: - RTI records showing official duty hours do not conclusively establish the defendant's location at the precise moment of the incident, as ASHA workers operate under flexible, task-based schedules - The defendant's presence at the incident was corroborated by her husband's testimony - The existence of pending litigation in RCS 105/2018 regarding the construction dispute indicated genuine underlying cause for the complaint - The plaintiff produced no documentary evidence of claimed business losses, expenses, or medical treatment - The plaintiff failed to prove malice or absence of reasonable and probable cause—critical elements for malicious prosecution This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 20-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  4. 17-Mar-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  5. 24-Feb-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  6. 31-Jan-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  7. 21-Jan-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  8. 23-Dec-2025

    Final Arguments

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  9. 02-Dec-2025

    Final Arguments

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  10. 26-Nov-2025

    Final Arguments

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  11. 12-Nov-2025

    Final Arguments

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  12. 08-Oct-2025

    Final Arguments

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  13. 10-Sep-2025

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  14. 13-Aug-2025

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  15. 23-Jul-2025

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  16. 24-Jun-2025

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  17. 29-Apr-2025

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  18. 02-Apr-2025

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  19. 10-Mar-2025

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  20. 10-Feb-2025

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  21. 27-Jan-2025

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  22. 16-Dec-2024

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  23. 13-Nov-2024

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  24. 16-Oct-2024

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  25. 20-Sep-2024

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  26. 02-Sep-2024

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  27. 06-Aug-2024

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  28. 09-Jul-2024

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  29. 13-Jun-2024

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  30. 30-Apr-2024

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  31. 09-Apr-2024

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  32. 12-Mar-2024

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  33. 16-Feb-2024

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  34. 23-Jan-2024

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  35. 03-Jan-2024

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  36. 05-Dec-2023

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  37. 27-Oct-2023

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  38. 03-Oct-2023

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  39. 04-Sep-2023

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  40. 02-Aug-2023

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  41. 03-Jul-2023

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  42. 24-May-2023

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  43. 03-May-2023

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  44. 05-Apr-2023

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  45. 28-Feb-2023

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  46. 04-Feb-2023

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  47. 03-Jan-2023

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  48. 13-Dec-2022

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  49. 07-Dec-2022

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  50. 04-Nov-2022

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  51. 02-Nov-2022

    Restored

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  52. 14-Jul-2022

    OrderView PDF

  53. 14-Jul-2022

    Disposed

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  54. 08-Jun-2022

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  55. 07-Apr-2022

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  56. 12-Mar-2022

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  57. 18-Feb-2022

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  58. 31-Dec-2021

    Issues

    5th Addl CIVIL Judge & JMFC

  59. 10-Nov-2021

    Issues

    5th Addl CIVIL Judge & JMFC

  60. 08-Sep-2021

    Issues

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  61. 15-Jul-2021

    Issues

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  62. 10-Jun-2021

    For Counter Affidavit

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  63. 16-Mar-2021

    For Counter Affidavit

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  64. 07-Jan-2021

    For Counter Affidavit

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  65. 26-Nov-2020

    Written Statement/Reply

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  66. 17-Sep-2020

    Written Statement/Reply

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  67. 09-Jul-2020

    Written Statement/Reply

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  68. 07-May-2020

    Written Statement/Reply

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  69. 21-Mar-2020

    Written Statement/Reply

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  70. 14-Feb-2020

    Written Statement/Reply

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  71. 26-Dec-2019

    Written Statement/Reply

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  72. 24-Oct-2019

    Written Statement/Reply

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.

  73. 29-Aug-2019

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  74. 19-Jul-2019

    Case filed

    Registration No. 119/2019

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: R.C.S. 119/2019 Court: Principal Civil Judge, Mansa Duration: 6 years, 4 months, 7 days (Registered: 13/11/2019 | Decided: 20/03/2026) Decision The court dismissed the plaintiff's suit seeking ₹50,000 in damages for alleged malicious prosecution. The court found the plaintiff failed to prove essential elements of malicious prosecution—specifically, that the defendant filed a false complaint without reasonable cause and with malicious intent. Key Facts The plaintiff claimed the defendant lodged a false police complaint on 07/09/2018 alleging an altercation during unauthorized construction, causing him legal harassment and business loss. The plaintiff argued the defendant was on duty at Itadara and could not have witnessed the incident. Court's Reasoning The court accepted the defendant's credible narrative that she returned home mid-day upon learning of a neighborhood death, was present during the altercation, and filed the complaint in good faith. The court found: - RTI records showing official duty hours do not conclusively establish the defendant's location at the precise moment of the incident, as ASHA workers operate under flexible, task-based schedules - The defendant's presence at the incident was corroborated by her husband's testimony - The existence of pending litigation in RCS 105/2018 regarding the construction dispute indicated genuine underlying cause for the complaint - The plaintiff produced no documentary evidence of claimed business losses, expenses, or medical treatment - The plaintiff failed to prove malice or absence of reasonable and probable cause—critical elements for malicious prosecution This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case