DHARMENDRAGIRI BALUGIRI GAUSWAMI vs RUDABHAI KUKABHAI SHIYAL Advocate - K T RATHOD — 67/2022
Case under Specific Relief Act, 1963 Section 10,37,38,39. Status: PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE. Next hearing: 08th June 2026.
RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT
CNR: GJGS080005422022
Next Hearing
08th June 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
67/2022
Filing Date
03-08-2022
Registration No
67/2022
Registration Date
03-08-2022
Court
TALUKA COURT, GIRGADHADA
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
DHARMENDRAGIRI BALUGIRI GAUSWAMI
Adv. R A PARMAR
Respondent(s)
RUDABHAI KUKABHAI SHIYAL Advocate - K T RATHOD
VITHALBHAI RUDABHAI SHIYAL
Adv. K T RATHOD
BABUBHAI RUDABHAI SHIYAL
Adv. K T RATHOD
RAMUBEN RUDABHAI SHIYAL
Adv. K T RATHOD
LABHAUBEN RUDABHAI SHIYAL
Adv. K T RATHOD
HIMATBHAI RUDABHAI SHIYAL
Adv. K T RATHOD
REKHABEN RUDABHAI SHIYAL
Adv. K T RATHOD
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 20-04-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE | |
| 09-03-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE | |
| 10-02-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE | |
| 05-01-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE | |
| 06-12-2025 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE |
Interim Orders
The court granted the plaintiff's interim relief (temporary injunction) application in this land dispute case. The court found that the plaintiff has established a prima facie case as the registered owner of the disputed land, and that the balance of convenience favors granting the injunction to prevent the defendants from interfering with the plaintiff's possession and land-related activities. The defendants are restrained from taking any action regarding the disputed property until final judgment in the case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The court granted the plaintiff's interim relief (temporary injunction) application in this land dispute case. The court found that the plaintiff has established a prima facie case as the registered owner of the disputed land, and that the balance of convenience favors granting the injunction to prevent the defendants from interfering with the plaintiff's possession and land-related activities. The defendants are restrained from taking any action regarding the disputed property until final judgment in the case. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts