KANUBHAI GIRDHARBHAI BIN JETHBHAI TALPADA vs NATUBHAI SAKRABHAI TALPADA Advocate - D.R.PATEL — 128/2019
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 96. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 06th March 2026.
RCA - REGULAR CIVIL APPEAL
CNR: GJKH010039542019
Filing Number
128/2019
Filing Date
23-Jul-2019
Registration No
128/2019
Registration Date
23-Jul-2019
Court
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT NADIAD
Judge
6-3rd Addl District Judge
Decision Date
06-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECTED
Last updated 16-Mar-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.KANUBHAI GIRDHARBHAI BIN JETHBHAI TALPADA
Adv. K.G.VOHRA
-
2.RAVJIBHAI CHHOTABHAI BIN MALABHAI TALPADA
Adv. K.G.VOHRA
Respondent(s)
-
1.NATUBHAI SAKRABHAI TALPADA Advocate - D.R.PATEL
-
2.ARVINDBHAI CHETANBHAI BIN SAKRABHAI
-
3.VINUBHAI CHETANBHAI BIN SAKRABHAI
-
4.SHARDABEN D/O CHIMANBHAI VAGHELA
Adv. B C PATEL
-
5.RAMESHBHAI CHIMANBHAI BIN VAGHABHAI TALPADA
Adv. B C PATEL
-
6.VIMLABEN D/O CHIMANBHAI VAGHABHAI
Adv. B C PATEL
-
7.BHANUBEN CHETANBHAI BIN SAKRABHAI
Adv. B C PATEL
-
8.MAHENDRABHAI CHIMANBHAI BIN VAGHABHAI TALPADA
Adv. B C PATEL
-
9.CHAMPABEN D/O CHIMANBHAI VAGHABHAI (HEIRS OF DECEASED CHIMANBHAI VAGHABHAI BIN ACHABHAI)
Adv. B C PATEL
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
06-Mar-2026
Judegement
Summary The High Court of Gujarat allowed the civil appeal, setting aside the trial court's judgment that had rejected the plaintiffs' claim to property ownership and possession. The court found that the plaintiffs had sufficiently proved their 35+ years of uninterrupted possession, cultivation, and residence on the disputed agricultural land through both oral and documentary evidence, and that the trial court erred in dismissing their case without proper consideration of the established legal principles governing possessory rights. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
06-Mar-2026
Disposed
3rd Addl District Judge
-
20-Feb-2026
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
30-Jan-2026
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
13-Jan-2026
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
26-Dec-2025
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
06-Dec-2025
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
21-Nov-2025
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
07-Nov-2025
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
17-Oct-2025
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
04-Oct-2025
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
26-Sep-2025
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
17-Sep-2025
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
08-Sep-2025
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
01-Sep-2025
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
28-Aug-2025
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
06-Aug-2025
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
29-Jul-2025
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
01-Jul-2025
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
17-Jun-2025
Hearing
4th Addl District Judge
-
23-Apr-2025
Hearing
4th Addl District Judge
-
12-Mar-2025
Hearing
4th Addl District Judge
-
29-Jan-2025
Hearing
4th Addl District Judge
-
18-Dec-2024
Hearing
4th Addl District Judge
-
13-Nov-2024
Hearing
4th Addl District Judge
-
14-Oct-2024
Order
-
14-Oct-2024
Hearing
4th Addl District Judge
-
11-Oct-2024
Hearing
4th Addl District Judge
-
10-Oct-2024
Hearing
4th Addl District Judge
-
22-Aug-2024
Hearing
4th Addl District Judge
-
04-Jul-2024
Hearing
4th Addl District Judge
-
08-May-2024
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
03-Apr-2024
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
01-Mar-2024
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
31-Jan-2024
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
29-Dec-2023
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
07-Dec-2023
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
08-Nov-2023
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
12-Oct-2023
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
14-Sep-2023
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
10-Aug-2023
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
13-Jul-2023
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
14-Jun-2023
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
10-May-2023
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
12-Apr-2023
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
09-Mar-2023
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
08-Feb-2023
Hearing
2nd Addl District Judge
-
11-Jan-2023
Hearing
2nd Addl District Judge
-
21-Dec-2022
Hearing
2nd Addl District Judge
-
23-Nov-2022
Hearing
2nd Addl District Judge
-
12-Oct-2022
Hearing
Addl. District Judge
-
21-Sep-2022
Hearing
Addl. District Judge
-
25-Aug-2022
Hearing
Addl. District Judge
-
30-Jul-2022
Hearing
Addl. District Judge
-
07-Jul-2022
Hearing
Addl. District Judge
-
15-Jun-2022
Hearing
Addl. District Judge
-
15-Apr-2022
Hearing
Addl. District Judge
-
04-Mar-2022
Hearing
Addl. District Judge
-
17-Feb-2022
Hearing
Addl. District Judge
-
18-Jan-2022
Hearing
Addl. District Judge
-
24-Dec-2021
Hearing
2nd Addl District Judge
-
17-Nov-2021
Hearing
2nd Addl District Judge
-
24-Sep-2021
Hearing
2nd Addl District Judge
-
27-Aug-2021
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
20-Jul-2021
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
21-May-2021
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
16-Apr-2021
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
17-Mar-2021
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
17-Feb-2021
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
30-Dec-2020
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
23-Nov-2020
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
08-Oct-2020
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
05-Sep-2020
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
06-Aug-2020
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
06-Jul-2020
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
01-Jun-2020
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
20-Apr-2020
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
30-Mar-2020
Hearing
3rd Addl District Judge
-
13-Feb-2020
Hearing
4th Addl District Judge
-
23-Jan-2020
Hearing
4th Addl District Judge
-
02-Jan-2020
Hearing
4th Addl District Judge
-
11-Dec-2019
Hearing
4th Addl District Judge
-
13-Nov-2019
Hearing
4th Addl District Judge
-
15-Oct-2019
Hearing
4th Addl District Judge
-
29-Aug-2019
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
23-Jul-2019
Case filed
Registration No. 128/2019
Summary The High Court of Gujarat allowed the civil appeal, setting aside the trial court's judgment that had rejected the plaintiffs' claim to property ownership and possession. The court found that the plaintiffs had sufficiently proved their 35+ years of uninterrupted possession, cultivation, and residence on the disputed agricultural land through both oral and documentary evidence, and that the trial court erred in dismissing their case without proper consideration of the established legal principles governing possessory rights. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts