RANGITSINH VAKHATSINH SOLANKI vs RESHAMBEN MANUBHAI RATHOD Advocate - K N MAKWANA — 6/2022

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 9,39,151. Status: PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE. Next hearing: 22nd June 2026.

RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT

CNR: GJKH070007052022

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

Next Hearing

22nd June 2026

Filing Number

6/2022

Filing Date

09-09-2022

Registration No

6/2022

Registration Date

09-09-2022

Court

TALUKA COURT, THASRA

Judge

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

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 9,39,151

Petitioner(s)

RANGITSINH VAKHATSINH SOLANKI

Adv. P G SHAHPATEL

BUDHABHAI VAKHATSINH SOLANKI

SAMANTSINH VAKHATSINH SOLANKI

KALPESHKUMAR RANGITSINH SOLANKI

KOKILABEN SAMANTSINH SOLANKI

Respondent(s)

RESHAMBEN MANUBHAI RATHOD Advocate - K N MAKWANA

ASHABEN MANUBHAI RATHOD

Adv. K N MAKWANA

KAPILABEN MANUBHAI RATHOD

Adv. K N MAKWANA

SUNILBHAI MANUBHAI RATHOD

Adv. N K VAGHELA

JAGDISHBHAI MANUBHAI RATHOD

Adv. K N MAKWANA

SONALBEN MANUBHAI RATHOD

Hearing History

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

08-06-2026

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

04-05-2026

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

20-04-2026

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

03-04-2026

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

16-03-2026

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

Interim Orders

06-01-2025
ORDER

CASE SUMMARY: 6/2022 Outcome: The court dismissed the plaintiffs' (Rangitsinh, Budhabhai, and Samantsinh Vakhatsinh Solanki) interim application for temporary injunction. The court found that the plaintiffs failed to establish primary ownership rights over the disputed agricultural land in Village Nanadora (Survey No. 532, Plot No. 4-53-25, with current revenue account no. 438). The defendants, as registered owners and possessors with documented sale deeds dating to 1989, retain valid legal title. No cost order was imposed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

CASE SUMMARY: 6/2022 Outcome: The court dismissed the plaintiffs' (Rangitsinh, Budhabhai, and Samantsinh Vakhatsinh Solanki) interim application for temporary injunction. The court found that the plaintiffs failed to establish primary ownership rights over the disputed agricultural land in Village Nanadora (Survey No. 532, Plot No. 4-53-25, with current revenue account no. 438). The defendants, as registered owners and possessors with documented sale deeds dating to 1989, retain valid legal title. No cost order was imposed. 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, THASRA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case