CHHAGANBHAI SAVABHAI MAVRIYA vs SARPANCHSHRI THROUGH NAJAPUR GRAMPANCHAYAT Advocate - K B PIPALIA — 36/2025
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 96. Disposed: Contested--JUDGEMENT on 13th May 2026.
RCA - REGULAR CIVIL APPEAL
CNR: GJJN010018142025
Filing Number
36/2025
Filing Date
29-Aug-2025
Registration No
36/2025
Registration Date
29-Aug-2025
Court
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT JUNAGADH
Judge
1-Principal District Judge
Decision Date
13-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGEMENT
Last updated 21-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.CHHAGANBHAI SAVABHAI MAVRIYA
Adv. D H LATHIGARA
Respondent(s)
-
1.SARPANCHSHRI THROUGH NAJAPUR GRAMPANCHAYAT Advocate - K B PIPALIA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
13-May-2026
Judegement
-
13-May-2026
Judegement
Summary The Principal District Judge of Junagadh dismissed the plaintiff's appeal against the trial court's judgment. The court held that the plaintiff failed to establish adverse possession over the disputed gram panchayat land because: (1) he did not specify when his possession became adverse; (2) he did not prove the land's vesting status; and (3) for government/pasture land, 30 years of continuous hostile possession is required, not 20 years as claimed. The appeal was dismissed with costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
13-May-2026
Disposed
Principal District Judge
-
30-Apr-2026
Judgement
Principal District Judge
-
09-Apr-2026
Judgement
Principal District Judge
-
02-Apr-2026
For Arguement of opponent
Principal District Judge
-
01-Apr-2026
Hearing
Principal District Judge
-
11-Mar-2026
Hearing
Principal District Judge
-
04-Feb-2026
Hearing
Principal District Judge
-
21-Jan-2026
Hearing
Principal District Judge
-
10-Dec-2025
Hearing
Principal District Judge
-
29-Oct-2025
Hearing
Principal District Judge
-
18-Sep-2025
Hearing
Principal District Judge
-
10-Sep-2025
Hearing
Principal District Judge
-
29-Aug-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
29-Aug-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 36/2025
Summary The Principal District Judge of Junagadh dismissed the plaintiff's appeal against the trial court's judgment. The court held that the plaintiff failed to establish adverse possession over the disputed gram panchayat land because: (1) he did not specify when his possession became adverse; (2) he did not prove the land's vesting status; and (3) for government/pasture land, 30 years of continuous hostile possession is required, not 20 years as claimed. The appeal was dismissed with costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts