hothibhai nurmamadbhai notiyar vs umar nurmamad notiyar Advocate - R N JADEJA — 4/2024

Case under Specific Relief Act, 1963 Section 39. Status: Final Arguments. Next hearing: 22nd June 2026.

Final Arguments Next hearing 22-Jun-2026 this date has passed

RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT

CNR: GJJM030002292024

Filing Number

4/2024

Filing Date

02-Feb-2024

Registration No

4/2024

Registration Date

02-Feb-2024

Court

TALUKA COURT, LALPUR

Judge

2-Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

Last updated 11-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Specific Relief Act, 1963 Section 39

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.hothibhai nurmamadbhai notiyar

    Adv. N R DHRUVA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.umar nurmamad notiyar Advocate - R N JADEJA

  2. 2.husen umar notiyar

    Adv. R N JADEJA

  3. 3.asif umar notiyar

    Adv. R N JADEJA

  4. 4.hanif umar notiyar

    Adv. R N JADEJA

Case History

  1. 22-Jun-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 08-Jun-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  3. 05-May-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  4. 27-Apr-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  5. 20-Apr-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  6. 13-Apr-2026

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  7. 16-Mar-2026

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  8. 24-Feb-2026

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  9. 10-Feb-2026

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  10. 19-Jan-2026

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  11. 09-Dec-2025

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  12. 18-Nov-2025

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  13. 03-Nov-2025

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  14. 13-Oct-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  15. 23-Sep-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  16. 26-Aug-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  17. 29-Jul-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  18. 07-Jul-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  19. 24-Jun-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  20. 06-May-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  21. 15-Apr-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  22. 18-Mar-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  23. 18-Feb-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  24. 18-Jan-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  25. 16-Jan-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  26. 02-Jan-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  27. 19-Dec-2024

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  28. 05-Dec-2024

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  29. 14-Nov-2024

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  30. 17-Oct-2024

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  31. 03-Oct-2024

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  32. 25-Sep-2024

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  33. 04-Sep-2024

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  34. 20-Aug-2024

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  35. 06-Aug-2024

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  36. 23-Jul-2024

    OrderView PDF

    Summary In Regular Civil Suit No. 04/2024, plaintiff Hothibhai Nurmamadbhai Notiyar sought a temporary injunction under Order 39, Rules 1-2 of the CPC against defendants Umar Nurmamad Notiyar, Husen Umar Notiyar, and Asif Umar Notiyar regarding disputed ancestral property in Vavdi Village, Jamnagar. The court rejected the injunction application, finding no prima facie case, no balance of convenience favoring the plaintiff, and no irreparable loss that couldn't be compensated monetarily. No costs were awarded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  37. 23-Jul-2024

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  38. 12-Jul-2024

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  39. 04-Jul-2024

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  40. 02-Jul-2024

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  41. 15-Jun-2024

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  42. 07-Jun-2024

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  43. 04-Jun-2024

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  44. 29-May-2024

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  45. 09-May-2024

    For Counter Affidavit

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  46. 02-May-2024

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  47. 19-Apr-2024

    Written Statement/Reply

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  48. 04-Apr-2024

    Written Statement/Reply

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  49. 19-Mar-2024

    Written Statement/Reply

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  50. 23-Feb-2024

    Written Statement/Reply

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  51. 16-Feb-2024

    Summons - Notice

    Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  52. 02-Feb-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  53. 02-Feb-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 4/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Summary In Regular Civil Suit No. 04/2024, plaintiff Hothibhai Nurmamadbhai Notiyar sought a temporary injunction under Order 39, Rules 1-2 of the CPC against defendants Umar Nurmamad Notiyar, Husen Umar Notiyar, and Asif Umar Notiyar regarding disputed ancestral property in Vavdi Village, Jamnagar. The court rejected the injunction application, finding no prima facie case, no balance of convenience favoring the plaintiff, and no irreparable loss that couldn't be compensated monetarily. No costs were awarded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case