MALEK SADIKHUSSAIN SABIRMIYA vs AYUBMIYA PIRSABMIYA MALEK Advocate - G.D.KHATRI — 242/2017
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 009. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 08th May 2026.
RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT
CNR: GJKH160009742017
Filing Number
242/2017
Filing Date
27-09-2017
Registration No
242/2017
Registration Date
27-09-2017
Court
TALUKA COURT, VASO
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
08th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
MALEK SADIKHUSSAIN SABIRMIYA
Adv. S M MALEK
Respondent(s)
AYUBMIYA PIRSABMIYA MALEK Advocate - G.D.KHATRI
GRAM PANCHAYAT - VASO
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
FINAL ARGUMENTS
FINAL ARGUMENTS
FINAL ARGUMENTS
FINAL ARGUMENTS
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 08-05-2026 | Disposed |
| 30-04-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
| 07-04-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
| 24-03-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
| 16-03-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: 242/2017 Court's Decision: The court decreed the petitioner's suit partially in his favor. The court found that Respondent No. 1 (Ayubmiya Pirsabmiya Malek) unlawfully constructed a door in the blind wall of his property (Survey No. 158) opening into the petitioner's property (Survey Nos. 156-157), and made unauthorized encroachment on the public road. The court ordered Respondent No. 1 to remove the door and encroachment at his own cost within 30 days. The petitioner's counter-claim was partly allowed, and Respondent No. 2 (Gram Panchayat Vaso) was directed to remove all encroachments from the common area within 30 days. Both parties bear their respective costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: 242/2017 Court's Decision: The court decreed the petitioner's suit partially in his favor. The court found that Respondent No. 1 (Ayubmiya Pirsabmiya Malek) unlawfully constructed a door in the blind wall of his property (Survey No. 158) opening into the petitioner's property (Survey Nos. 156-157), and made unauthorized encroachment on the public road. The court ordered Respondent No. 1 to remove the door and encroachment at his own cost within 30 days. The petitioner's counter-claim was partly allowed, and Respondent No. 2 (Gram Panchayat Vaso) was directed to remove all encroachments from the common area within 30 days. Both parties bear their respective 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