YUNUSBHAI MOHAMMADBHAI VHORA vs HEIRS OF LATE UDESINH DHULABHAI PARMAR1. — 79/2025
Case under Limitation Act, 1963 Section 5. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 17th March 2026.
CMA DC - CIVIL MISC. APPLICATION - DISTRICT COURT
CNR: GJKH010039452025
Filing Number
79/2025
Filing Date
11-Jun-2025
Registration No
79/2025
Registration Date
11-Jun-2025
Court
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT NADIAD
Judge
5-4th Addl District Judge
Decision Date
17-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
Last updated 16-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.YUNUSBHAI MOHAMMADBHAI VHORA
Adv. R S PATEL
Respondent(s)
-
1.HEIRS OF LATE UDESINH DHULABHAI PARMAR1.
-
2.REVABEN UDESINH DHULABHAI PARMAR
Adv. N K GOHIL1.
-
3.AJITSINH UDESINH DHULABHAI PARMAR
Adv. N K GOHIL1.
-
4.HIMANTSINH UDESINH DHULABHAI PARMAR
Adv. N K GOHIL1.
-
5.RANJITSINH UDESINH DHULABHAI PARMAR
Adv. N K GOHIL1.
-
6.CHHATRASINH UDESINH DHULABHAI PARMAR
Adv. N K GOHIL1.
-
7.BALVANTSINH UDESINH DHULABHAI PARMAR
Adv. N K GOHIL1.
-
8.PRAVINSINH UDESINH DHULABHAI PARMAR
Adv. N K GOHIL
-
9.BHUPATSINH RATANSINH BHAIJIBHAI PARMAR
-
10.HEIRS OF RAVJIBHAI RATANSINHBHAI BHAEJIBHAI PARMAR(Legal Heir)
-
11.DHULABHAI RATANSINH BHAIJIBHAI PARMAR
-
12.FATESINH RATANSINH BHAIJIBHAI PARMAR
Adv. N A ROHIT
-
13.KANUBHAI GALABBHAI PARMAR
-
14.HEIRS OF LATE AMBALAL MOTIBHAI PARMAR(Legal Heir)
-
15.KAMLABEN MOTIBHAI PARMAR
-
16.SHARDABEN MOTIBHAI PARMAR
-
17.UDESINH MOHANBHAI PARMAR
-
18.UMEDBHAI MOHANBHAI PARMAR
-
19.HIMMATBHAI MOHANBHAI PARMAR
-
20.AKSHRES JAYENDRAKUMAR PATEL
-
21.JAYENDRAKUMAR CHHAGANBHAI PATEL
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
17-Mar-2026
JudegementView PDF
Case Summary: C.M.A.(Delay) No.79/2025 Court Decision: The court allowed the condonation of delay application and permitted Yunusbhai Mohammadbhai Vohra to file his appeal 8 days late against the trial court's judgment in Special Civil Suit No.82/2011. The court found his reasons—obtaining certified copies and the intervening court summer vacation—sufficient to justify the delay. Key Reasoning: The judge emphasized that filing an appeal is a statutory right and that disputes should be decided on merits rather than dismissed on technicalities. A lenient approach to delay condonation applications was deemed appropriate in the interest of justice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
17-Mar-2026
Disposed
4th Addl District Judge
-
27-Feb-2026
Order
4th Addl District Judge
-
28-Jan-2026
Notice To Opponents
4th Addl District Judge
-
31-Dec-2025
Notice To Opponents
4th Addl District Judge
-
06-Dec-2025
Notice To Opponents
4th Addl District Judge
-
19-Nov-2025
Notice To Opponents
4th Addl District Judge
-
18-Oct-2025
Notice To Opponents
4th Addl District Judge
-
29-Sep-2025
Notice To Opponents
4th Addl District Judge
-
12-Sep-2025
Notice To Opponents
4th Addl District Judge
-
19-Aug-2025
Notice To Opponents
4th Addl District Judge
-
15-Jul-2025
Notice To Opponents
4th Addl District Judge
-
11-Jun-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
11-Jun-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 79/2025
Case Summary: C.M.A.(Delay) No.79/2025 Court Decision: The court allowed the condonation of delay application and permitted Yunusbhai Mohammadbhai Vohra to file his appeal 8 days late against the trial court's judgment in Special Civil Suit No.82/2011. The court found his reasons—obtaining certified copies and the intervening court summer vacation—sufficient to justify the delay. Key Reasoning: The judge emphasized that filing an appeal is a statutory right and that disputes should be decided on merits rather than dismissed on technicalities. A lenient approach to delay condonation applications was deemed appropriate in the interest of justice. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts