JAYESHKUMAR KANUBHAI PATEL vs KIRTIKUMAR RATILAL PATEL Advocate - B P PUROHIT — 9/2023

Case under Specific Relief Act, 1963 Section 34,38,9. Status: Plaintiff Evidence. Next hearing: 27th April 2026.

Plaintiff Evidence Next hearing 27-Apr-2026 this date has passed

RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT

CNR: GJKH170001212023

Filing Number

9/2023

Filing Date

06-Feb-2023

Registration No

9/2023

Registration Date

06-Feb-2023

Court

Taluka Court, Galteshwar

Judge

1-Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

Last updated 23-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Specific Relief Act, 1963 Section 34,38,9

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.JAYESHKUMAR KANUBHAI PATEL

    Adv. K N PATEL

  2. 2.KPATEL KOMALBEN @ MAYANKBHAI ANUBHAI

  3. 3.PATEL DRUHVIBEN MAYANKBHAI

  4. 4.PATEL PARTH MAYANKBHAI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.KIRTIKUMAR RATILAL PATEL Advocate - B P PUROHIT

  2. 2.HEMANTBHAI MANIBHAI PATEL

  3. 3.DINESHBHAI VITTHALBHAI PATEL

  4. 4.RAGHUBHAI GHELABHAI PATEL

Case History

  1. 27-Apr-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 01-Apr-2026

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  3. 09-Mar-2026

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  4. 16-Feb-2026

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  5. 12-Jan-2026

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  6. 22-Dec-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  7. 03-Dec-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  8. 10-Nov-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  9. 13-Oct-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  10. 29-Sep-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  11. 15-Sep-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  12. 25-Aug-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  13. 30-Jul-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  14. 14-Jul-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  15. 16-Jun-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  16. 28-Apr-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  17. 23-Apr-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  18. 07-Apr-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  19. 24-Mar-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  20. 05-Mar-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  21. 12-Feb-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  22. 20-Jan-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  23. 30-Dec-2024

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  24. 02-Dec-2024

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  25. 25-Nov-2024

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  26. 11-Nov-2024

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  27. 07-Oct-2024

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  28. 30-Sep-2024

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  29. 04-Sep-2024

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  30. 05-Aug-2024

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  31. 22-Jul-2024

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  32. 15-Jul-2024

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  33. 02-Jul-2024

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  34. 15-Jun-2024

    Defendant Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  35. 10-Jun-2024

    Issues

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  36. 08-Apr-2024

    Issues

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  37. 04-Mar-2024

    Issues

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  38. 12-Feb-2024

    Issues

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  39. 05-Feb-2024

    Issues

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  40. 15-Jan-2024

    Issues

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  41. 16-Dec-2023

    OrderView PDF

    SUMMARY Petition: R.C.S. No. 09/2023 Court: Gujarat High Court Outcome: The petition has been dismissed. The Court found that the plaintiffs failed to establish a prima facie case for injunction against the defendants. The Court held that: 1. The plaintiffs could not prove ownership/exclusive possession of the disputed agricultural land (Survey No. 347/2) 2. The defendants' land sale documents were legally valid and properly registered 3. The plaintiffs' claim that defendants encroached on their land lacks sufficient documentary evidence and proper land survey measurements from both parties 4. Without measuring both survey numbers (plaintiff's and defendant's), no proper conclusion about encroachment could be drawn 5. The plaintiffs failed to follow statutory procedures for land measurement and did not obtain proper technical surveys The Court declined to grant injunction relief, finding no irreparable harm or balance of convenience in the plaintiffs' favor, particularly where the underlying prima facie case itself was weak. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  42. 16-Dec-2023

    Issues

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  43. 07-Dec-2023

    Order On Injuction Application

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  44. 02-Dec-2023

    Order On Injuction Application

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  45. 30-Nov-2023

    Order On Injuction Application

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  46. 03-Nov-2023

    Order On Injuction Application

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  47. 09-Oct-2023

    Order On Injuction Application

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  48. 04-Sep-2023

    Order On Injuction Application

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  49. 07-Aug-2023

    Order On Injuction Application

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  50. 24-Jul-2023

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  51. 19-Jul-2023

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  52. 12-Jul-2023

    Hearing On Injunction Application

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  53. 03-Jul-2023

    Order On Injuction Application

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  54. 19-Jun-2023

    Order On Injuction Application

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  55. 12-Jun-2023

    Order On Injuction Application

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  56. 27-Apr-2023

    Order On Injuction Application

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  57. 17-Apr-2023

    Order On Injuction Application

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  58. 12-Apr-2023

    Order On Injuction Application

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  59. 03-Apr-2023

    Order On Injuction Application

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  60. 01-Apr-2023

    Order On Injuction Application

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  61. 15-Mar-2023

    Order On Injuction Application

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  62. 13-Mar-2023

    Counter Claim

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  63. 10-Mar-2023

    Counter Claim

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  64. 01-Mar-2023

    Counter Claim

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  65. 22-Feb-2023

    Counter Claim

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  66. 15-Feb-2023

    Counter Claim

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  67. 10-Feb-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  68. 06-Feb-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. 9/2023

casestatus.in Summary

SUMMARY Petition: R.C.S. No. 09/2023 Court: Gujarat High Court Outcome: The petition has been dismissed. The Court found that the plaintiffs failed to establish a prima facie case for injunction against the defendants. The Court held that: 1. The plaintiffs could not prove ownership/exclusive possession of the disputed agricultural land (Survey No. 347/2) 2. The defendants' land sale documents were legally valid and properly registered 3. The plaintiffs' claim that defendants encroached on their land lacks sufficient documentary evidence and proper land survey measurements from both parties 4. Without measuring both survey numbers (plaintiff's and defendant's), no proper conclusion about encroachment could be drawn 5. The plaintiffs failed to follow statutory procedures for land measurement and did not obtain proper technical surveys The Court declined to grant injunction relief, finding no irreparable harm or balance of convenience in the plaintiffs' favor, particularly where the underlying prima facie case itself was weak. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case