NATHUSINH GULABSINH DABHI vs LAKAHABHAI PUNABHAI DABHI Advocate - P B VARSOLIYA — 94/2023

Case under Specific Relief Act, 1963 Section 31. Status: PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE. Next hearing: 25th June 2026.

RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT

CNR: GJKH030023362023

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

Next Hearing

25th June 2026

Filing Number

94/2023

Filing Date

05-10-2023

Registration No

94/2023

Registration Date

05-10-2023

Court

TALUKA COURT, MEHMEDABAD

Judge

1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

Acts & Sections

Specific Relief Act, 1963 Section 31

Petitioner(s)

NATHUSINH GULABSINH DABHI

Adv. M A PATHAN

Respondent(s)

LAKAHABHAI PUNABHAI DABHI Advocate - P B VARSOLIYA

MADHIBEN MADHABHAI DABHI

Adv. P B VARSOLIYA

DINESHBHAI MADHABHAI DABHI

Adv. P B VARSOLIYA

VINODBHAI MADHABHAI DABHI

Adv. P B VARSOLIYA

SONI VASANTKUMAR DAMODARDAS

Adv. P B VARSOLIYA

Hearing History

Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

30-04-2026

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

12-03-2026

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

29-01-2026

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

18-12-2025

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

11-12-2025

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

Interim Orders

21-09-2024
ORDER

Case Summary: R.C.S. No. 94/2023 Petitioner: Nathusinh Gulabsinh Dabhi Respondents: Lakahabhai Punabhai Dabhi and others Outcome: The petitioner's revision petition is allowed. The court set aside the lower court's order and directed that the petitioner's original suit regarding the disputed property be decided on its merits. The court found that the petitioner had valid grounds regarding a sale agreement for agricultural land in Shantrund village, and that the respondents failed to properly follow contractual procedures and provide required notices. The case is remitted for proper adjudication according to law. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: R.C.S. No. 94/2023 Petitioner: Nathusinh Gulabsinh Dabhi Respondents: Lakahabhai Punabhai Dabhi and others Outcome: The petitioner's revision petition is allowed. The court set aside the lower court's order and directed that the petitioner's original suit regarding the disputed property be decided on its merits. The court found that the petitioner had valid grounds regarding a sale agreement for agricultural land in Shantrund village, and that the respondents failed to properly follow contractual procedures and provide required notices. The case is remitted for proper adjudication according to law. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, MEHMEDABAD All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case