KANUBHAI RAMANBHAI VASAVA vs ARCHANABEN NITINKUMAR THAKAR-HEIRS OF PANDYA SHARADABEN CHIMANLAL Advocate - P G SHAHPATEL — 21/2024
Case under Gujarat (bombay) Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 Section 12(1). Status: DEFENDANT EVIDENCE. Next hearing: 01st May 2026.
RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT
CNR: GJKH070007502024
Next Hearing
01st May 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
21/2024
Filing Date
24-06-2024
Registration No
21/2024
Registration Date
24-06-2024
Court
TALUKA COURT, THASRA
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
KANUBHAI RAMANBHAI VASAVA
Adv. D B PARMAR
Respondent(s)
ARCHANABEN NITINKUMAR THAKAR-HEIRS OF PANDYA SHARADABEN CHIMANLAL Advocate - P G SHAHPATEL
VISHAL NITINKUMAR THAKAR
Adv. P G SHAHPATEL
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
DEFENDANT EVIDENCE
DEFENDANT EVIDENCE
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 17-04-2026 | DEFENDANT EVIDENCE | |
| 23-03-2026 | DEFENDANT EVIDENCE | |
| 09-03-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE | |
| 16-02-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE | |
| 06-02-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE |
Interim Orders
Summary This is a Gujarati court order regarding a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution. The court dismissed the petition (નકારામાં) and rejected most of the petitioner's contentions regarding alleged wrongful harassment by government officials. The court found that the petitioner's claims lacked merit and that the defendant officials acted within their authority. The order also directed the petitioner to bear court costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary This is a Gujarati court order regarding a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution. The court dismissed the petition (નકારામાં) and rejected most of the petitioner's contentions regarding alleged wrongful harassment by government officials. The court found that the petitioner's claims lacked merit and that the defendant officials acted within their authority. The order also directed the petitioner to bear court costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts