SBURBHAI JAVARABHAI PARAMAR vs LATE AATAMARAM AVACHALBHAI PARAMR Advocate - F F PATHAN1. — 24/2009

Case under Specific Relief Act, 1963 Section 034,038. Status: PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE. Next hearing: 19th June 2026.

RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT

CNR: GJKH040000292009

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

Next Hearing

19th June 2026

Filing Number

24/2009

Filing Date

06-06-2009

Registration No

24/2009

Registration Date

06-06-2009

Court

TALUKA COURT, MATAR

Judge

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

Acts & Sections

Specific Relief Act, 1963 Section 034,038

Petitioner(s)

SBURBHAI JAVARABHAI PARAMAR

Adv. B A PATEL

Respondent(s)

LATE AATAMARAM AVACHALBHAI PARAMR Advocate - F F PATHAN1.

BHIKHABHAI AATAMARAM PARAMAR 1.

VINUBHAI AATAMARAM PARAMAR 1.

SURESHBHAI AATAMARAM PARAMAR

LATE JALAMBHAI AVACHALBAHI PARMAR 2.

JIBABEN JALAMBHAI PARMAR 2.

PUNAMBHAI JALAMBHAI PARMARR

CHANCHLBEN DHOBABHAI PARAMR

RAVAJIBHAI PARSOTAMBHAI PARAMR

Hearing History

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

03-06-2026

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

26-05-2026

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

08-05-2026

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

21-04-2026

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

30-03-2026

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

Interim Orders

08-03-2013
Order Number 1

Case Summary: RCS/24/2009 Outcome: The petition is partially allowed. The court granted the petitioner (Sburabhai Javarabhai Paramar) relief regarding certain disputed land parcels in Block 58, ordering that he receives ownership of specified survey numbers (26/2 and 26/3) of the contested property. However, regarding survey number 26/1, which is in the respondent's name, no relief was granted as the petitioner lacks standing to claim it. The court directed that case costs follow the final decision on the main suit. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: RCS/24/2009 Outcome: The petition is partially allowed. The court granted the petitioner (Sburabhai Javarabhai Paramar) relief regarding certain disputed land parcels in Block 58, ordering that he receives ownership of specified survey numbers (26/2 and 26/3) of the contested property. However, regarding survey number 26/1, which is in the respondent's name, no relief was granted as the petitioner lacks standing to claim it. The court directed that case costs follow the final decision on the main suit. 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, MATAR All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case