RAHEMATBEN @ JETUNBEN DAUDBHAI AJMERI vs AJMERI HASINABEN DINMAHAMMAD Advocate - M.R.BHATT — 123/2019

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

Case disposed

RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT

CNR: GJGN040012382019

Filing Number

123/2019

Filing Date

19-Jul-2019

Registration No

123/2019

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.RAHEMATBEN @ JETUNBEN DAUDBHAI 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. 123/2019 Court Decision: The Principal Civil Judge, Mansa dismissed the plaintiff's suit seeking ₹50,000 damages for alleged malicious prosecution. The court found the plaintiff failed to prove the defendant filed a false complaint with malice or without reasonable cause. Key Reasoning: The court held that while the plaintiff claimed the defendant was at work at Itadara when the incident occurred on 07/09/2018, credible evidence showed ASHA workers operate under flexible, task-based schedules allowing mid-day absences upon telephonic notification without written logs. The defendant's testimony, corroborated by her husband and the Medical Officer, established her plausible presence at the incident. The plaintiff produced no documentary evidence of business loss, expenses, or medical treatment, and no independent witnesses contradicted the defendant's account. Since an underlying genuine dispute existed in pending civil litigation and competent authorities found prima facie grounds for preventive proceedings, the essential elements of malicious prosecution remained unproven. 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. 123/2019

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: R.C.S. 123/2019 Court Decision: The Principal Civil Judge, Mansa dismissed the plaintiff's suit seeking ₹50,000 damages for alleged malicious prosecution. The court found the plaintiff failed to prove the defendant filed a false complaint with malice or without reasonable cause. Key Reasoning: The court held that while the plaintiff claimed the defendant was at work at Itadara when the incident occurred on 07/09/2018, credible evidence showed ASHA workers operate under flexible, task-based schedules allowing mid-day absences upon telephonic notification without written logs. The defendant's testimony, corroborated by her husband and the Medical Officer, established her plausible presence at the incident. The plaintiff produced no documentary evidence of business loss, expenses, or medical treatment, and no independent witnesses contradicted the defendant's account. Since an underlying genuine dispute existed in pending civil litigation and competent authorities found prima facie grounds for preventive proceedings, the essential elements of malicious prosecution remained unproven. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case