CHETAN KAMAL TOLANI vs RUPA HUNDALDAS TOLANI — 47/2025

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 9. Status: Plaintiff Evidence. Next hearing: 09th June 2026.

Plaintiff Evidence Next hearing 09-Jun-2026

RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT

CNR: GJKT020007952025

Filing Number

47/2025

Filing Date

18-Jan-2025

Registration No

47/2025

Registration Date

18-Jan-2025

Court

CIVIL COURT BHUJ

Judge

46-3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge and A.C.J.M.

Last updated 21-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 9

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.CHETAN KAMAL TOLANI

    Adv. D M JADEJA

  2. 2.VIJAY KAMAL TOLANI

    Adv. D M JADEJA

  3. 3.PRADEEP KAMAL TOLANI

    Adv. D M JADEJA

  4. 4.DIPESH VISHNU TOLANI

    Adv. D M JADEJA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.RUPA HUNDALDAS TOLANI

  2. 2.RAJESH LAKHMANBHAI CHAD

    Adv. A A THACKER

  3. 3.ICICI BANK(ATMARAM BRANCH)

    Adv. R K RUPAREL

  4. 4.DINESH HINDUJA

  5. 5.RAJANI HINDUJA

  6. 6.JAYSHREE HINDUJA

  7. 7.NEETA HINDUJA

  8. 8.GAURAV HINDUJA

  9. 9.ANKIT HINDUJA

  10. 10.KAMLA KAMAL TOLANI

  11. 11.NARAIN HUNDALDAS TOLANI

  12. 12.ARPIT GOBIND TOLANI

  13. 13.PRITI VISHNU TOLANI

  14. 14.ANJALI VISHNU TOLANI

  15. 15.SHANKAR HUNDALDAS TOLANI

Case History

  1. 09-Jun-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 21-Apr-2026

    Plaintiff Evidence

    4th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  3. 11-Mar-2026

    Plaintiff Evidence

    4th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  4. 20-Feb-2026

    OrderView PDF

  5. 20-Feb-2026

    OrderView PDF

    Court Order Summary Case: Land Dispute - Temporary Injunction Application (Case No. 47/2025, Bhuj District Court, Gujarat) Outcome: The Court dismissed the plaintiff's application for temporary injunction. The court held that the plaintiffs failed to establish a prima facie case for a temporary restraining order against defendants from transferring/selling the disputed property (Survey No. 649, 1,49,500 sq.m., Loriya village, Bhuj district). The court found the plaintiffs' ownership claims deficient and the balance of convenience favoring the defendants, particularly ICICI Bank's secured creditor rights under SARFAESI Act. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  6. 20-Feb-2026

    Plaintiff Evidence

    4th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  7. 17-Jan-2026

    Hearing

    4th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  8. 16-Dec-2025

    Hearing

    3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge and A.C.J.M.

  9. 06-Dec-2025

    Hearing

    3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge and A.C.J.M.

  10. 15-Nov-2025

    Hearing

    3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge and A.C.J.M.

  11. 28-Oct-2025

    Hearing

    3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge and A.C.J.M.

  12. 04-Oct-2025

    Hearing

    3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge and A.C.J.M.

  13. 20-Sep-2025

    Hearing

    3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge and A.C.J.M.

  14. 02-Sep-2025

    Hearing

    3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge and A.C.J.M.

  15. 30-Aug-2025

    Hearing

    3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge and A.C.J.M.

  16. 02-Aug-2025

    Hearing

    3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge and A.C.J.M.

  17. 19-Jul-2025

    Summons - Notice

    3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge and A.C.J.M.

  18. 21-Jun-2025

    Summons - Notice

    3rd Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge and A.C.J.M.

  19. 03-May-2025

    Summons - Notice

    5th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  20. 29-Mar-2025

    Summons - Notice

    5th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  21. 01-Mar-2025

    Summons - Notice

    5th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  22. 07-Feb-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  23. 18-Jan-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 47/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Court Order Summary Case: Land Dispute - Temporary Injunction Application (Case No. 47/2025, Bhuj District Court, Gujarat) Outcome: The Court dismissed the plaintiff's application for temporary injunction. The court held that the plaintiffs failed to establish a prima facie case for a temporary restraining order against defendants from transferring/selling the disputed property (Survey No. 649, 1,49,500 sq.m., Loriya village, Bhuj district). The court found the plaintiffs' ownership claims deficient and the balance of convenience favoring the defendants, particularly ICICI Bank's secured creditor rights under SARFAESI Act. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case