Parmar Maheshbhai Dadhyabhai vs Talati Cum Mantri Advocate - B.A.NAYAK — 40/2018

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 27,. Status: DEFENDANT EVIDENCE. Next hearing: 14th May 2026.

RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT

CNR: GJMH060023812018

DEFENDANT EVIDENCE

Next Hearing

14th May 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

40/2018

Filing Date

16-10-2018

Registration No

40/2018

Registration Date

16-10-2018

Court

TALUKA COURT, VISNAGAR

Judge

3-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM

Acts & Sections

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 Section 27,

Petitioner(s)

Parmar Maheshbhai Dadhyabhai

Adv. S.I.PATEL

Respondent(s)

Talati Cum Mantri Advocate - B.A.NAYAK

Taluka Vikas Adhikari

Adv. R.J.DAVE

Hearing History

Judge: 3-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM

06-03-2026

DEFENDANT EVIDENCE

17-01-2026

DEFENDANT EVIDENCE

09-12-2025

DEFENDANT EVIDENCE

07-11-2025

DEFENDANT EVIDENCE

09-10-2025

DEFENDANT EVIDENCE

Interim Orders

04-03-2023
ORDER

Summary Case: Rcs 40/2018 (Civil Revision) Outcome: The plaintiff's revision petition is allowed. The court set aside the disputed notice/order and directed the defendant organization to remove an illegal encroachment (referred to as a "zampa"/obstruction) that was blocking the plaintiff's access to an internal road within the Gitanjali Society in Visnagar. The court found the defendant organization had acted without proper authority in issuing notices and creating obstacles that violated the plaintiff's legitimate rights to use the society's internal roads, and ordered restoration of the plaintiff's access within four months. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary Case: Rcs 40/2018 (Civil Revision) Outcome: The plaintiff's revision petition is allowed. The court set aside the disputed notice/order and directed the defendant organization to remove an illegal encroachment (referred to as a "zampa"/obstruction) that was blocking the plaintiff's access to an internal road within the Gitanjali Society in Visnagar. The court found the defendant organization had acted without proper authority in issuing notices and creating obstacles that violated the plaintiff's legitimate rights to use the society's internal roads, and ordered restoration of the plaintiff's access within four months. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, VISNAGAR All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case