MANISHABEN RATILAL RATHOD vs RATILAL GOTABHAI RATHOD Advocate - S F BHOJANI — 35/2014
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 009. Status: DEFENDANT EVIDENCE. Next hearing: 02nd April 2026.
RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT
CNR: GJKH120000862014
Next Hearing
02nd April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
35/2014
Filing Date
22-09-2014
Registration No
35/2014
Registration Date
22-09-2014
Court
TALUKA COURT, DAKOR
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
MANISHABEN RATILAL RATHOD
Adv. V J VARMA
RANJITBHAI RATILAL RATHOD
Adv. V J VARMA
NILESHBHAI RATILAL RATHOD
Adv. V J VARMA
Respondent(s)
RATILAL GOTABHAI RATHOD Advocate - S F BHOJANI
GANGABEN GOTABHAI RATHOD
Adv. A P PARMAR
KAILASHBEN JAYANTIBHAI RATHOD
Adv. S F BHOJANI
JAYABEN GOTABHAI RATHOD
CHAMPABEN WIDOW OF GOTABHAI FULABHAI ROTHAD
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
DEFENDANT EVIDENCE
DEFENDANT EVIDENCE
DEFENDANT EVIDENCE
DEFENDANT EVIDENCE
DEFENDANT EVIDENCE
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | DEFENDANT EVIDENCE | |
| 13-02-2026 | DEFENDANT EVIDENCE | |
| 31-01-2026 | DEFENDANT EVIDENCE | |
| 15-01-2026 | DEFENDANT EVIDENCE | |
| 19-12-2025 | DEFENDANT EVIDENCE |
Interim Orders
Case Summary Court Order: R.C.S.35-2014 (Gujarat High Court) The court partially allowed the plaintiff's petition regarding a property dispute. The court issued an injunction restraining defendants 1-4 from transferring, selling, or assigning the disputed agricultural property until the case is finally decided, while also directing them to bear all costs and applicable interest. However, the court dismissed certain reliefs sought by the plaintiff regarding exclusive possession and other ancillary claims, finding insufficient evidence of the plaintiff's primary ownership rights over the self-acquired property in question. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary Court Order: R.C.S.35-2014 (Gujarat High Court) The court partially allowed the plaintiff's petition regarding a property dispute. The court issued an injunction restraining defendants 1-4 from transferring, selling, or assigning the disputed agricultural property until the case is finally decided, while also directing them to bear all costs and applicable interest. However, the court dismissed certain reliefs sought by the plaintiff regarding exclusive possession and other ancillary claims, finding insufficient evidence of the plaintiff's primary ownership rights over the self-acquired property in question. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts