PATEL SEJALBEN ASHVINKUMAR vs THAKOR KANTABEN AMBARAM Advocate - V J THAKOR — 15/2023

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 133,C80,0380. Status: PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE. Next hearing: 15th June 2026.

RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT

CNR: GJMH030011892023

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

Next Hearing

15th June 2026

Filing Number

15/2023

Filing Date

14-02-2023

Registration No

15/2023

Registration Date

14-02-2023

Court

TALUKA COURT, KADI

Judge

2-2nd ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE & A.C.J.M.

Acts & Sections

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 Section 133,C80,0380

Petitioner(s)

PATEL SEJALBEN ASHVINKUMAR

Adv. H J PANCHOLI

Respondent(s)

THAKOR KANTABEN AMBARAM Advocate - V J THAKOR

RAMTUJI AMBARAMJI

MANAJI AMBARAMJI

Adv. V J THAKOR

RANJANBEN PRATAPJI

Adv. V J THAKOR

THAKOR RAMAJI PRATAPJI

Adv. V J THAKOR

THAKOR ROHITJI PRATAPJI

Adv. V J THAKOR

DINESHJI SHAKRAJI

VASUJI RAMTUJI

MAKIBEN RAMTUJI

THAKOR ASHABEN RAMTUJI

Hearing History

Judge: 2-2nd ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE & A.C.J.M.

17-04-2026

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

10-03-2026

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

03-02-2026

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

15-12-2025

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

10-11-2025

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

Interim Orders

12-03-2025
ORDER
12-03-2025
ORDER

Court Order Summary Petition Allowed – The court granted the plaintiff's application for a mandatory injunction to restrain the defendants from selling or transferring the disputed agricultural property and ordered them to maintain the status quo. The court found that the plaintiff had a prima facie case for relief based on documentary evidence showing a valid purchase agreement, and there was irreparable harm if the property were alienated before final judgment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Court Order Summary Petition Allowed – The court granted the plaintiff's application for a mandatory injunction to restrain the defendants from selling or transferring the disputed agricultural property and ordered them to maintain the status quo. The court found that the plaintiff had a prima facie case for relief based on documentary evidence showing a valid purchase agreement, and there was irreparable harm if the property were alienated before final judgment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, KADI All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case