MAHOBATSINH S/O PUNJABHAI FATESINH DABHI vs RAMAJI CHUNTHAJI PARMAR Advocate - B H MALEK — 49/2020
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 31. Status: PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE. Next hearing: 09th July 2026.
RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT
CNR: GJKH080004272020
Next Hearing
09th July 2026
Filing Number
49/2020
Filing Date
12-11-2020
Registration No
49/2020
Registration Date
12-11-2020
Court
TALUKA COURT, KATHLAL
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
MAHOBATSINH S/O PUNJABHAI FATESINH DABHI
Adv. H M JOSHI
BALUSINH UMEDSINH DABHI
Adv. H M JOSHI
BHARATSINH LALSINH DABI
Adv. H M JOSHI
VIRENDRASINH TAKHATSINH DABHI
Adv. H M JOSHI
RANJITSINH ABHESINH DABHI
Adv. H M JOSHI
JUVANSINH BADARSINH DABHI
Adv. H M JOSHI
KADUSINH UDESINH DABHI
Adv. H M JOSHI
VANRAJSINH LAXMANSINH DABHI
Adv. H M JOSHI
AMARSINH VAJESINH DABHI
Adv. H M JOSHI
Respondent(s)
RAMAJI CHUNTHAJI PARMAR Advocate - B H MALEK
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 14-05-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE |
| 12-03-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE |
| 22-01-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE |
| 16-12-2025 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE |
| 25-11-2025 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE |
Interim Orders
Case 49/2020 Summary: The court granted the petitioners' interim relief application. The Principal Civil Judge of Kathlal ruled that the respondent is enjoined from interfering with the petitioners' possession of the disputed agricultural land until final judgment. The respondent is prohibited from transferring, mortgaging, or disposing of the property in any manner, and must maintain the status quo. The court found the petitioners established a prima facie case based on 50-60 years of continuous possession through their predecessors, along with payment of property taxes and revenue obligations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case 49/2020 Summary: The court granted the petitioners' interim relief application. The Principal Civil Judge of Kathlal ruled that the respondent is enjoined from interfering with the petitioners' possession of the disputed agricultural land until final judgment. The respondent is prohibited from transferring, mortgaging, or disposing of the property in any manner, and must maintain the status quo. The court found the petitioners established a prima facie case based on 50-60 years of continuous possession through their predecessors, along with payment of property taxes and revenue obligations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts