KASHIRAM ANUBHAI BHARWAD vs HATHIBHAI KISHABHAI PARMAR Advocate - D H BAROT — 62/2012

Case under Specific Relief Act, 1963 Section 020,038. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 23rd March 2026.

RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT

CNR: GJKH040000682012

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

62/2012

Filing Date

14-12-2012

Registration No

62/2012

Registration Date

14-12-2012

Court

TALUKA COURT, MATAR

Judge

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

Decision Date

23rd March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

Acts & Sections

SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT, 1963 Section 020,038

Petitioner(s)

KASHIRAM ANUBHAI BHARWAD

Adv. S M PATHAN

Respondent(s)

HATHIBHAI KISHABHAI PARMAR Advocate - D H BAROT

UDESANG KISHBHAI PARMAR

LALJIBHAI KISHABHAI PARMAR

Hearing History

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

23-03-2026

Disposed

09-03-2026

FINAL ARGUMENTS

26-02-2026

FINAL ARGUMENTS

19-02-2026

FINAL ARGUMENTS

17-02-2026

FINAL ARGUMENTS

Final Orders / Judgements

23-03-2026
JUDEGEMENT
23-03-2026
JUDEGEMENT

The court rejected the plaintiff's suit for specific performance and permanent injunction regarding agricultural land, finding the 1990 agreement to sell invalid under Section 43 of the Tenancy Act (1948) since the property was restricted tenure land requiring Collector's sanction that was never obtained. The court also found the suit barred by limitation (22-year delay) and held that the plaintiff failed to prove the seller had authority to transfer the property. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Interim Orders

08-01-2025
ORDER
casestatus.in Summary

The court rejected the plaintiff's suit for specific performance and permanent injunction regarding agricultural land, finding the 1990 agreement to sell invalid under Section 43 of the Tenancy Act (1948) since the property was restricted tenure land requiring Collector's sanction that was never obtained. The court also found the suit barred by limitation (22-year delay) and held that the plaintiff failed to prove the seller had authority to transfer the property. 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