NILESH VISHANJI DEDHIYA vs SHRI KUCH BIDADA VISHA OSVAL JAIN DERASAR SANG Advocate - V V MAHESHWARI — 78/2025

Case under Specific Relief Act, 1963 Section 34,38,39. Status: Plaintiff Evidence. Next hearing: 25th June 2026.

Plaintiff Evidence Next hearing 25-Jun-2026 this date has passed

RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT

CNR: GJKT040012802025

Filing Number

78/2025

Filing Date

19-Aug-2025

Registration No

78/2025

Registration Date

19-Aug-2025

Court

TALUKA COURT, MANDVI

Judge

1-Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

Last updated 21-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Specific Relief Act, 1963 Section 34,38,39

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.NILESH VISHANJI DEDHIYA

    Adv. P S SANGAR

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SHRI KUCH BIDADA VISHA OSVAL JAIN DERASAR SANG Advocate - V V MAHESHWARI

  2. 2.KESHAVJI KHIMAJI MARU PRESIDENT OF SHRI KUTCH BIDADA VISHA OSVAL JAIN DERASARVASI SANG

    Adv. V V MAHESHWARI

Case History

  1. 25-Jun-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 08-Apr-2026

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  3. 11-Mar-2026

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  4. 18-Feb-2026

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  5. 30-Jan-2026

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  6. 17-Dec-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  7. 03-Dec-2025

    Issues

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  8. 29-Oct-2025

    Issues

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  9. 01-Oct-2025

    OrderView PDF

    Summary The court dismissed the plaintiff's interim relief application (petition) with no stay order against the defendants' construction work. The judge found the plaintiff had not established a prima facie case or sufficient equity in their favor, as the property ownership, boundaries, and access rights were disputed and evidenced by conflicting registration documents. The defendants' right to construct on their registered property (Plot 1414) could not be restrained based on the plaintiff's deficient evidence and contradictory claims regarding shared property boundaries. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  10. 01-Oct-2025

    Issues

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  11. 23-Sep-2025

    Order On Injuction Application

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  12. 17-Sep-2025

    Order On Injuction Application

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  13. 03-Sep-2025

    Written Statement/Reply

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  14. 26-Aug-2025

    Summons - Notice

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  15. 19-Aug-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  16. 19-Aug-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 78/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court dismissed the plaintiff's interim relief application (petition) with no stay order against the defendants' construction work. The judge found the plaintiff had not established a prima facie case or sufficient equity in their favor, as the property ownership, boundaries, and access rights were disputed and evidenced by conflicting registration documents. The defendants' right to construct on their registered property (Plot 1414) could not be restrained based on the plaintiff's deficient evidence and contradictory claims regarding shared property boundaries. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case