JADAVBHAI RAMABHAI PAMPANIYA vs LATE. BHENIBEN W/O PUNJABHAI SOALNKINA VARSHO 1. PUNJABHAI GOVINDBHAI SOLANKI — 303/2022

Case under Specific Relief Act, 1963 Section 34,37,38,. Status: JUDGEMENT. Next hearing: 27th April 2026.

RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT

CNR: GJGS050010022022

JUDGEMENT

Next Hearing

27th April 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

303/2022

Filing Date

07-11-2022

Registration No

303/2022

Registration Date

07-11-2022

Court

TALUKA COURT, SUTRAPADA

Judge

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

Acts & Sections

SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT, 1963 Section 34,37,38,

Petitioner(s)

JADAVBHAI RAMABHAI PAMPANIYA

Adv. H C CHAUHAN

VIRABHAI RAMBHAI PAMPANIYA

Adv. H C CHAUHAN

JIVABHAI RAMBHAI PAMPANIYA

Respondent(s)

LATE. BHENIBEN W/O PUNJABHAI SOALNKINA VARSHO 1. PUNJABHAI GOVINDBHAI SOLANKI

DEVSHIBHAI PUNJABHAI SOLANKI

Adv. I K CHANDNANI

MINIBEN D/O PUNJABHAI SOLANKI

Adv. K I CHANDNANI

VIJUBEN D/O PUNJABHAI SOLANKI

Adv. I K CHANDNANI

KADVIBEN D/O PUNJABHAI SOLANKI

Adv. I K CHANDNANI

DEVIBEN D/O PUNJABHAI SOLANKI

Adv. I K CHANDNANI

RANIBEN D/O PUNJABHAI SOLANKI

Adv. I K CHANDNANI

Hearing History

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

25-03-2026

JUDGEMENT

09-03-2026

FINAL ARGUMENTS

23-02-2026

DEFENDANT EVIDENCE

29-01-2026

DEFENDANT EVIDENCE

19-01-2026

DEFENDANT EVIDENCE

Interim Orders

25-10-2023
ORDER

Case Summary: R.C.S No-303/2022 The court granted the plaintiff's application for temporary injunction. The defendants are restrained from interfering with the plaintiff's right of way on the disputed land (survey no-193) until final disposal of the suit. The court found that the plaintiff established a prima facie case, balance of convenience, and risk of irreparable loss, noting the plaintiff's alleged 100-year use of the way as evidenced by village maps and court commissioner reports. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: R.C.S No-303/2022 The court granted the plaintiff's application for temporary injunction. The defendants are restrained from interfering with the plaintiff's right of way on the disputed land (survey no-193) until final disposal of the suit. The court found that the plaintiff established a prima facie case, balance of convenience, and risk of irreparable loss, noting the plaintiff's alleged 100-year use of the way as evidenced by village maps and court commissioner reports. 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, SUTRAPADA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case