PRAKASHBHAI RAMABHAI BALASARA vs DEVIBEN RAMBHAI BALASARA Advocate - D D ACHARYA — 74/2023
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 54. Status: Plaintiff Evidence. Next hearing: 22nd June 2026.
RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT
CNR: GJJM090005832023
Filing Number
74/2023
Filing Date
22-Dec-2023
Registration No
74/2023
Registration Date
22-Dec-2023
Court
TALUKA COURT, JODIYA
Judge
1-Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
Last updated 12-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.PRAKASHBHAI RAMABHAI BALASARA
Adv. V S MANSATTA
Respondent(s)
-
1.DEVIBEN RAMBHAI BALASARA Advocate - D D ACHARYA
-
2.SANJAY RAMBHAI BALASARA
Adv. D D ACHARYA
-
3.DINESH RAMBHAI BALASARA
Adv. D D ACHARYA
-
4.GULABBEN DINESH BALASARA
Adv. D D ACHARYA
-
5.KRISH DINESHBHAI BALASARA AS MINOR SHRI GULABBEN DINESHBHAI BALASARA
Adv. D D ACHARYA
-
6.VIDHI DINESHBHAI BALASARA AS MINOR SHRI GULABBEN DINESHBHAI BALASARA
Adv. D D ACHARYA
-
7.NITABEN SANJABHAI BALASARA
Adv. D D ACHARYA
-
8.RAJVIR SANJAYBHAI BALASARA AS MINOR
Adv. D D ACHARYA
-
9.RIDHDHI SANJAYBHAI BALASARA AS MINOR
Adv. D D ACHARYA
Case History
-
22-Jun-2026
Next hearingPending
-
20-Apr-2026
Plaintiff Evidence
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
16-Mar-2026
Plaintiff Evidence
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
02-Mar-2026
Plaintiff Evidence
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
09-Feb-2026
Issues
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
12-Jan-2026
Issues
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
15-Dec-2025
Issues
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
17-Nov-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
13-Oct-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
24-Sep-2025
Written Statement/Reply
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
15-Sep-2025
Written Statement/Reply
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
25-Aug-2025
Written Statement/Reply
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
11-Aug-2025
Written Statement/Reply
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
22-Jul-2025
Written Statement/Reply
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
23-Jun-2025
Written Statement/Reply
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
10-Jun-2025
Written Statement/Reply
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
20-May-2025
Written Statement/Reply
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
25-Mar-2025
OrderView PDF
Case Summary: 74/2023 Outcome: The defendants' application to reject the plaint under CPC Order VII, Rule 11(a) was rejected. The court found the plaintiff has a valid cause of action and the suit can proceed. Key Facts: Plaintiff Prakashbhai (son of deceased's first wife) filed a partition suit claiming a 1/4 share in five agricultural properties. Defendants (deceased's second wife and her children) argued the plaintiff had no legal right since some properties were self-acquired by the deceased and plaintiff's name wasn't entered in revenue records for three survey numbers (169, 649, 650). Court's Reasoning: While plaintiff was admittedly entered as heir in two survey numbers (240, 241), the critical issue—whether the remaining three properties are ancestral or self-acquired—requires evidence and cannot be decided at the plaint rejection stage. Since defendants themselves admitted plaintiff inherited two properties, allowing rejection would cause multiplicity of proceedings. The suit must proceed to evidence stage for proper resolution. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
25-Mar-2025
Written Statement/Reply
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
13-Mar-2025
Written Statement/Reply
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
12-Mar-2025
Written Statement/Reply
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
27-Jan-2025
Written Statement/Reply
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
31-Dec-2024
Written Statement/Reply
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
26-Nov-2024
Written Statement/Reply
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
22-Oct-2024
Written Statement/Reply
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
01-Oct-2024
Written Statement/Reply
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
02-Sep-2024
Written Statement/Reply
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
06-Aug-2024
Written Statement/Reply
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
29-Jun-2024
Written Statement/Reply
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
14-May-2024
Written Statement/Reply
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
23-Apr-2024
Written Statement/Reply
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
30-Mar-2024
Written Statement/Reply
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
11-Mar-2024
Written Statement/Reply
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
07-Mar-2024
Written Statement/Reply
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
30-Jan-2024
Written Statement/Reply
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
03-Jan-2024
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
22-Dec-2023
Case filed
Registration No. 74/2023
Case Summary: 74/2023 Outcome: The defendants' application to reject the plaint under CPC Order VII, Rule 11(a) was rejected. The court found the plaintiff has a valid cause of action and the suit can proceed. Key Facts: Plaintiff Prakashbhai (son of deceased's first wife) filed a partition suit claiming a 1/4 share in five agricultural properties. Defendants (deceased's second wife and her children) argued the plaintiff had no legal right since some properties were self-acquired by the deceased and plaintiff's name wasn't entered in revenue records for three survey numbers (169, 649, 650). Court's Reasoning: While plaintiff was admittedly entered as heir in two survey numbers (240, 241), the critical issue—whether the remaining three properties are ancestral or self-acquired—requires evidence and cannot be decided at the plaint rejection stage. Since defendants themselves admitted plaintiff inherited two properties, allowing rejection would cause multiplicity of proceedings. The suit must proceed to evidence stage for proper resolution. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts