JIVIBEN PARSOTTAMBHAI AMARSEDA HEIRS OF PARSOTAMBHAI JINABHAI vs HEIRS OF DECD. KANTILAL CHHAGANLAL — 41/2023
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 96. Disposed: Contested--JUDGEMENT on 13th May 2026.
RCA - REGULAR CIVIL APPEAL
CNR: GJJN010018692023
Filing Number
41/2023
Filing Date
01-Dec-2023
Registration No
41/2023
Registration Date
01-Dec-2023
Court
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT JUNAGADH
Judge
1-Principal District Judge
Decision Date
13-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--JUDGEMENT
Last updated 27-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.JIVIBEN PARSOTTAMBHAI AMARSEDA HEIRS OF PARSOTAMBHAI JINABHAI
Adv. H N DAVE
-
2.GAURIBEN PARSOTAMBHAI AMARSEDA HEIRS OF PARSOTAMBHAI JINABHAI
Adv. H N DAVE
-
3.HARESHBHAI PARSOTAMBHAI AMARSEDA HEIRS OF PARSOTAMBHAI JINABHAI
Adv. H N DAVE
-
4.HITESHBHAI PARSOTAMBHAI AMARSEDA HEIRS OF PARSOTAMBHAI JINABHAI
Adv. H N DAVE
-
5.HEIRS OF DECD. HIMATLAL JINABHAI(Legal Heir) 5.
-
6.HETALBEN HIMATLAL AMARSEDA
Adv. H N DAVE5.
-
7.ATULBHAI HIMATLAL AMRASEDA
Adv. H N DAVE5.
-
8.JAYSHREEBEN HIMATLAL AMARSEDA
Adv. H N DAVE5.
-
9.ASHVINBHAI HIMATLAL AMRSEDA
Adv. H N DAVE5.
-
10.HITESHBHAI HIMATLAL AMRASEDA
Adv. H N DAVE
-
11.HEIARS OF DECD. BHANIBEN JINABHAI(Legal Heir)
Adv. H N DAVE6.
-
12.PRAVINBHAI CHAGANBHAI SARVAIYA
Adv. H N DAVE
-
13.HEIRS OF VAJIBEN JINABHAI(Legal Heir)
Adv. H N DAVE7.
-
14.NAVINBHAI BHAGVANBHAI SIKOTARA
Adv. H N DAVE7.
-
15.INDUBEN BHAGVANBHAI SIKOTARA
Adv. H N DAVE7.
-
16.RINABEN HIMATBHAI
Adv. H N DAVE
-
17.HEIRS OF DECD. LILABEN JINA(Legal Heir)
Adv. H N DAVE8.
-
18.DALSUKHBHAI KARSHANBHAI KAMOTHI
Adv. H N DAVE8.
-
19.MADHUBEN KARSHANBHAI KAMOTHI
Adv. H N DAVE8.
-
20.RAMESHBHAI KARSHANHAI KAMOTHI
Adv. H N DAVE8.
-
21.VASANTBHAI KARSHANBHAI KAMOTHI
Adv. H N DAVE
-
22.HEIRS OF DECD. VIJAYABEN JINA(Legal Heir) 9.
-
23.BHARKHADA HARESH BHIMJIBHAI
Adv. H N DAVE9.
-
24.BHARKHADA REKHABEN DIPAKBHAI BHIMJIBHAI
Adv. H N DAVE9.
-
25.BHARKHADA VASANTBHAI BHIMJIBHAI
Adv. H N DAVE9.
-
26.VADHER REKHABEN KISHORBHAI
Adv. H N DAVE
-
27.JAYVANTIBEN JINABHAI
Adv. H N DAVE
Respondent(s)
-
1.HEIRS OF DECD. KANTILAL CHHAGANLAL
-
2.HEIRS OF DEC. DALSUKHBHAI RANCHODBHAI AMARSEDA(Legal Heir)
Adv. V J PIPALIA
-
3.RATILAL MANJIBHAI AMARSEDA(Legal Heir)
-
4.THE STATE
Adv. V G DONGA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
13-May-2026
JudegementView PDF
CASE SUMMARY: RCA No. 41/2023 Court: Principal District Judge, Junagadh (First Appeal) Parties: Heirs of Parsotambhai Jinabhai (Appellants/Plaintiffs) v. Heirs of Kantilal Chhaganlal, Dalsukhbhai Ranchodbhai, and Ratilal Manjibhai (Respondents/Defendants) Decision: Appeal dismissed; Trial Court judgment upheld. Core Issue: Whether plaintiffs had exclusive ownership of disputed property (Village Bhalgam, Account No. 163) and right to confirm revenue Entry No. 2408. Key Findings: The court rejected plaintiffs' claim that their grandfather (Jina Keshav) was sole owner. It found: (1) plaintiffs failed to prove exclusive ownership through cogent documentary evidence; (2) the suit was barred under Section 11 of the Revenue Jurisdiction Act, 1876, as plaintiffs didn't exhaust available administrative remedies; (3) the possession claim was time-barred under the Limitation Act (defendants held possession for 12+ years since 1950 partition and 1982 sales); and (4) registered sale deeds (dated 1982) demonstrated Jina Keshav's heirs had validly sold the property to defendants' ancestors. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
13-May-2026
Disposed
Principal District Judge
-
12-May-2026
Judgement
Principal District Judge
-
04-May-2026
Judgement
Principal District Judge
-
09-Apr-2026
Judgement
Principal District Judge
-
12-Mar-2026
Final Arguments
Principal District Judge
-
25-Feb-2026
Final Arguments
Principal District Judge
-
09-Feb-2026
Hearing
Principal District Judge
-
19-Jan-2026
Hearing
Principal District Judge
-
03-Dec-2025
Hearing
Principal District Judge
-
12-Nov-2025
Hearing
Principal District Judge
-
01-Oct-2025
Hearing
Principal District Judge
-
21-Aug-2025
Hearing
Principal District Judge
-
31-Jul-2025
Hearing
Principal District Judge
-
26-Jun-2025
Hearing
Principal District Judge
-
19-Jun-2025
Summons - Notice
Principal District Judge
-
08-May-2025
Summons - Notice
Principal District Judge
-
24-Apr-2025
Summons - Notice
Principal District Judge
-
27-Mar-2025
Summons - Notice
Principal District Judge
-
03-Mar-2025
Summons - Notice
Principal District Judge
-
21-Feb-2025
Summons - Notice
Principal District Judge
-
06-Feb-2025
Summons - Notice
Principal District Judge
-
29-Jan-2025
Summons - Notice
Principal District Judge
-
10-Jan-2025
Summons - Notice
Principal District Judge
-
01-Jan-2025
Summons - Notice
Principal District Judge
-
04-Dec-2024
Summons - Notice
Principal District Judge
-
13-Nov-2024
Summons - Notice
Principal District Judge
-
23-Oct-2024
Summons - Notice
Principal District Judge
-
09-Oct-2024
Summons - Notice
Principal District Judge
-
18-Sep-2024
Summons - Notice
Principal District Judge
-
21-Aug-2024
Summons - Notice
Principal District Judge
-
22-Jul-2024
Summons - Notice
Principal District Judge
-
15-Jun-2024
Summons - Notice
Principal District Judge
-
01-May-2024
Summons - Notice
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
28-Mar-2024
Summons - Notice
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
15-Feb-2024
Summons - Notice
Principal District & Sessions Judge
-
16-Jan-2024
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
01-Dec-2023
Case filed
Registration No. 41/2023
CASE SUMMARY: RCA No. 41/2023 Court: Principal District Judge, Junagadh (First Appeal) Parties: Heirs of Parsotambhai Jinabhai (Appellants/Plaintiffs) v. Heirs of Kantilal Chhaganlal, Dalsukhbhai Ranchodbhai, and Ratilal Manjibhai (Respondents/Defendants) Decision: Appeal dismissed; Trial Court judgment upheld. Core Issue: Whether plaintiffs had exclusive ownership of disputed property (Village Bhalgam, Account No. 163) and right to confirm revenue Entry No. 2408. Key Findings: The court rejected plaintiffs' claim that their grandfather (Jina Keshav) was sole owner. It found: (1) plaintiffs failed to prove exclusive ownership through cogent documentary evidence; (2) the suit was barred under Section 11 of the Revenue Jurisdiction Act, 1876, as plaintiffs didn't exhaust available administrative remedies; (3) the possession claim was time-barred under the Limitation Act (defendants held possession for 12+ years since 1950 partition and 1982 sales); and (4) registered sale deeds (dated 1982) demonstrated Jina Keshav's heirs had validly sold the property to defendants' ancestors. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts