PATEL KANTIBHAI KACHARABHAI vs THAKOR LAKSHMANSINH AMARSINH Advocate - V B VAIDYA — 47/2025
Case under Specific Relief Act, 1963 Section 34,38,. Status: PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE. Next hearing: 07th May 2026.
RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT
CNR: GJMH070019092025
Next Hearing
07th May 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
47/2025
Filing Date
09-09-2025
Registration No
47/2025
Registration Date
09-09-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, VIJAPUR
Judge
5-ADDI CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
PATEL KANTIBHAI KACHARABHAI
Adv. J L PATHAN
PATEL APARNABEN KANTIBHAI VITHTHALDAS
Respondent(s)
THAKOR LAKSHMANSINH AMARSINH Advocate - V B VAIDYA
THAKOR RANJITSINH DINESHSINH
Adv. V B VAIDYA
THAKOR SHARDABA DALPATSINH
Adv. V B VAIDYA
THAKOR KANAKSINH ADAJI
Adv. V B VAIDYA
THAKOR BHIKHUSINH HAJURSANG
Adv. V B VAIDYA
THAKOR ANVARSINH HAJURSANG
Adv. V B VAIDYA
THAKOR PRAVINSINH HAJURSANG
Adv. V B VAIDYA
THAKOR DANSINH KODARSANG
Adv. V B VAIDYA
THAKOR DURSINH KODARSANG
Adv. V B VAIDYA
THAKOR VAKTUSINH KODARSANG RATNAJI
Adv. V B VAIDYA
THAKOR JAGATSINH KODARSANG RATANAJI
Adv. V B VAIDYA
THAKOR URFE CHAUHAN KAILASHBA MAHENDRASINH
Adv. V B VAIDYA
THAKOR JITENDRASINH DALPATSINH
Adv. V B VAIDYA
THAKOR RAJENDRASINH DALPATSINH
Adv. V B VAIDYA
THAKOR DHARAMSINH DALPATSINH
Adv. V B VAIDYA
CHAUHAN SAVITABEN KANAKSINH
Adv. V B VAIDYA
CHAUHAN NANDUBA KANAKSINH
Adv. V B VAIDYA
CHAUHAN JASHIBEN KANAKSINH
Adv. V B VAIDYA
CHAUHAN JAYENDRASINH KANAKSINH
Adv. V B VAIDYA
PRAJAPATI PRAVINBHAI HARGOVANDAS
Adv. A M SAIYAD
Hearing History
Judge: 5-ADDI CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 06-04-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE | |
| 16-03-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE | |
| 07-03-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE | |
| 26-02-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE | |
| 19-02-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE |
Interim Orders
Summary: The court dismissed the plaintiff's interim relief application (Anjak-5) under the Specific Relief Act. The court found that the plaintiff did not establish a prima facie case, as the sale deed was executed in favor of defendant no. 20 and the plaintiff failed to demonstrate performance of contractual conditions or that monetary compensation would be inadequate. Consequently, the court ruled against all four issues raised and ordered the petition dismissed with costs to follow the final judgment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary: The court dismissed the plaintiff's interim relief application (Anjak-5) under the Specific Relief Act. The court found that the plaintiff did not establish a prima facie case, as the sale deed was executed in favor of defendant no. 20 and the plaintiff failed to demonstrate performance of contractual conditions or that monetary compensation would be inadequate. Consequently, the court ruled against all four issues raised and ordered the petition dismissed with costs to follow the final judgment. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts