D/D CHATURBHAI DHULABHAI SODHA PARMAR HEIRS vs D/D KANJIBHAI SHANKARBHAI PARMAR HEIRS Advocate - F A PATHAN — 29/2015
Case under Specific Relief Act, 1963 Section 020. Status: PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE. Next hearing: 30th March 2026.
RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT
CNR: GJKH040000392015
Next Hearing
30th March 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
29/2015
Filing Date
06-04-2015
Registration No
29/2015
Registration Date
06-04-2015
Court
TALUKA COURT, MATAR
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
D/D CHATURBHAI DHULABHAI SODHA PARMAR HEIRS
Adv. B A PATEL
BUDHABHAI CHATURBHAI SODHA PARMAR
BHIKHABHAI CHATURBHAI SODHA PARMAR
KUSIBEN D/O CHATURBHAI SODHA PARMAR
MADHIBEN D/O CHATURBHAI SODHA PARMAR
NEERIBEN D/O CHATURBHAI SODHA PARMAR
D/D PUNJABHAI SOMABHAI SODHA PARMAR
KHODABHAI PUNJABHAI SODHA PARMAR
D/D SHANTABEN D/O PUNJABHAI SOMABHAI SODHA PARMAR
RAVJIBHAI GOTABHAI ZALA
Respondent(s)
D/D KANJIBHAI SHANKARBHAI PARMAR HEIRS Advocate - F A PATHAN
HARSHADBHAI KANJIBHAI PARMAR
Adv. F.A.PATHAN
SHAKRIBEN KANJIBHAI PARMAR
Adv. F.A.PATHAN
RAMABHAI PUNJABHAI PARMAR
Adv. F.A.PATHAN
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE | |
| 11-02-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE | |
| 13-01-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE | |
| 16-12-2025 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE | |
| 28-11-2025 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE |
Interim Orders
Summary The court dismissed the plaintiff's civil suit regarding disputed agricultural land (Block No. 149). The court found that the defendants had already obtained valid sale deeds for the property and possessed it in good faith, thus the plaintiff's claims lacked merit and were not entitled to relief. The judgment was rendered by the Principal Civil Judge, Matar on July 27, 2022. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The court dismissed the plaintiff's civil suit regarding disputed agricultural land (Block No. 149). The court found that the defendants had already obtained valid sale deeds for the property and possessed it in good faith, thus the plaintiff's claims lacked merit and were not entitled to relief. The judgment was rendered by the Principal Civil Judge, Matar on July 27, 2022. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts