JAMILKHAN SHIRINKHAN PATHAN vs GOVINDBHAI POPATBHAI CHAVDA — 15/2025
Case under Succession Act,indian 1925 Section 272. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 16th March 2026.
CMA SC - CIVIL MISC. APPLICATION - SR/CIVIL/SMALL CAUSE COU
CNR: GJKH110009792025
Filing Number
15/2025
Filing Date
04-08-2025
Registration No
15/2025
Registration Date
04-08-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, KHEDA
Judge
3-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
Decision Date
16th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--REJECTED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
JAMILKHAN SHIRINKHAN PATHAN
Adv. M A MANSURI
Respondent(s)
GOVINDBHAI POPATBHAI CHAVDA
RASHESHKUMAR HASMUKHABHAI PATEL
Adv. S C SHARMA
ALPESHKUMAR BIPINCHANDRA PATEL
SANDIP BIPINCHANDRA PATEL
Hearing History
Judge: 3-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
NOTICE TO OPPONENTS
NOTICE TO OPPONENTS
NOTICE TO OPPONENTS
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 16-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 16-02-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 02-02-2026 | NOTICE TO OPPONENTS |
| 30-12-2025 | NOTICE TO OPPONENTS |
| 21-11-2025 | NOTICE TO OPPONENTS |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary of Civil Case 15/2025 The court dismissed the petitioner's plea to restore a land sale dispute case. The petitioner sought to revive a case dismissed in December 2023 due to his continued absence and failure to appear despite multiple court orders and notices. The court found no satisfactory explanation for the 19-month delay in filing the restoration petition and noted the petitioner failed to provide reasonable grounds justifying the dismissal's reversal, citing established precedent that delays cannot be condoned without adequate cause. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary of Civil Case 15/2025 The court dismissed the petitioner's plea to restore a land sale dispute case. The petitioner sought to revive a case dismissed in December 2023 due to his continued absence and failure to appear despite multiple court orders and notices. The court found no satisfactory explanation for the 19-month delay in filing the restoration petition and noted the petitioner failed to provide reasonable grounds justifying the dismissal's reversal, citing established precedent that delays cannot be condoned without adequate cause. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts