NIYAMAK SHREE, BHARAT SARASVATI MADIR vs HEIRS OF DECEASED KALABHAI GIGABHAI CHUDASAMA, 1. BHAVESHBHAI KALABHAI CHUDASMA Advocate - M M KHANIYA — 9/2024
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 9. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 06th March 2026.
EXE R - EXECUTION PETITION - REGULAR
CNR: GJJN070006112024
Filing Number
9/2024
Filing Date
05-Apr-2024
Registration No
9/2024
Registration Date
05-Apr-2024
Court
TALUKA COURT, MANGROL
Judge
1-Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
06-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECTED
Last updated 15-Mar-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.NIYAMAK SHREE, BHARAT SARASVATI MADIR
Adv. K B PARMAR
Respondent(s)
-
1.HEIRS OF DECEASED KALABHAI GIGABHAI CHUDASAMA, 1. BHAVESHBHAI KALABHAI CHUDASMA Advocate - M M KHANIYA
-
2.2. DINESHBHAI KALABHAI CHUDASAMA
Adv. M M KHANIYA
-
3.3. GOVINDBHAI KALABHAI CHUDASMA
Adv. M M KHANIYA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
06-Mar-2026
Order
Court Decision Summary Reg.Ex.Petition No.09/2024 - Primary Civil Judge, Mangrol The court dismissed the execution petition filed by the plaintiff seeking enforcement of a previous decree for land possession. The court found that: (1) the plaintiff lacks actual possession of the disputed agricultural land (Survey No. 340, Plot 48-05-67), which is a prerequisite for execution; (2) there is a defect in parties—necessary heirs of the original defendant were not joined, and the State (which has revenue records showing interest in the land) was not made a party. Consequently, the execution proceeding cannot proceed due to these legal impediments and lack of established possession. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
06-Mar-2026
Disposed
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
24-Feb-2026
Hearing On Objections
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
16-Feb-2026
Hearing On Objections
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
19-Jan-2026
Hearing On Objections
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
31-Dec-2025
Hearing On Objections
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
04-Dec-2025
Hearing On Objections
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
01-Oct-2025
Hearing On Objections
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
23-Sep-2025
Hearing On Objections
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
02-Aug-2025
Hearing On Objections
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
16-Jul-2025
Hearing On Objections
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
09-Jul-2025
Hearing On Objections
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
30-Jun-2025
Hearing On Objections
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
12-Jun-2025
Hearing On Objections
Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
08-May-2025
Hearing On Objections
Principal CIVIL Judge
-
27-Mar-2025
Hearing On Objections
Principal CIVIL Judge
-
13-Feb-2025
Hearing On Objections
Principal CIVIL Judge
-
13-Jan-2025
Reply
Principal CIVIL Judge
-
28-Nov-2024
Reply
Principal CIVIL Judge
-
05-Oct-2024
Reply
Principal CIVIL Judge
-
31-Aug-2024
Reply
Principal CIVIL Judge
-
16-Jul-2024
Reply
Principal CIVIL Judge
-
13-Jun-2024
Show-Cause Notice To Judgement Debtor
Principal CIVIL Judge
-
05-Apr-2024
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
05-Apr-2024
Case filed
Registration No. 9/2024
Court Decision Summary Reg.Ex.Petition No.09/2024 - Primary Civil Judge, Mangrol The court dismissed the execution petition filed by the plaintiff seeking enforcement of a previous decree for land possession. The court found that: (1) the plaintiff lacks actual possession of the disputed agricultural land (Survey No. 340, Plot 48-05-67), which is a prerequisite for execution; (2) there is a defect in parties—necessary heirs of the original defendant were not joined, and the State (which has revenue records showing interest in the land) was not made a party. Consequently, the execution proceeding cannot proceed due to these legal impediments and lack of established possession. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts