HANSABEN KHODABHAI CHAUHAN vs XXXX — 1/2026
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 47,114,151. Disposed: Uncontested--REJECTED on 06th April 2026.
CMA SC - CIVIL MISC. APPLICATION - SR/CIVIL/SMALL CAUSE COU
CNR: GJKH030000042026
Filing Number
1/2026
Filing Date
06-01-2026
Registration No
1/2026
Registration Date
06-01-2026
Court
TALUKA COURT, MEHMEDABAD
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
06th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--REJECTED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
HANSABEN KHODABHAI CHAUHAN
HANSABEN KHODABHAI CHAUHAN
LAXMIBEN KHODABHAI CHAUHAN
RANJANBEN KHODABHAI CHAUHAN
NITIBEN KALABHAI MOHANBHAI
RONAKKUMAR BHARTBHAI SHARMA
RAJDEEPSINH VANRAJSINH RAOL
Respondent(s)
XXXX
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
JUDGEMENT
JUDGEMENT
JUDGEMENT
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 04-04-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 27-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 24-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 16-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary of Civil Review Application No. 1/2026 The court dismissed the review petition filed by Hansaben Khodabhai Chauhan and Laxmiben Khodabhai Chauhan. The petitioners sought to clarify and amend a previous settlement order in Regular Civil Suit No. 73/2024 regarding agricultural land ownership in Moze Gam, Mehsana District, but the court held that review powers can only correct clear mistakes on record, not substitute new interpretations or add substantive changes to settled orders. Following the precedent in *Lily Thomas v. Union of India*, the court found that the petitioners were essentially attempting to re-argue the case rather than point out demonstrable errors, making the review petition impermissible. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary of Civil Review Application No. 1/2026 The court dismissed the review petition filed by Hansaben Khodabhai Chauhan and Laxmiben Khodabhai Chauhan. The petitioners sought to clarify and amend a previous settlement order in Regular Civil Suit No. 73/2024 regarding agricultural land ownership in Moze Gam, Mehsana District, but the court held that review powers can only correct clear mistakes on record, not substitute new interpretations or add substantive changes to settled orders. Following the precedent in *Lily Thomas v. Union of India*, the court found that the petitioners were essentially attempting to re-argue the case rather than point out demonstrable errors, making the review petition impermissible. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts