Lt. VORA BAKIRBHAI TAHERALI NA VARASDAR VORA MURTUZABHAI BAKIRBHAI LAKADAVALA(Legal Heir) vs NILESHBHAI JAYSUKHBHAI RATHOD Advocate - P S SHAH — 37/2020

Case under Specific Relief Act, 1963 Section 34,39,. Status: PLAINTIFFS EVIDENCE. Next hearing: 03rd April 2026.

RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT

CNR: GJMR040008912020

PLAINTIFFS EVIDENCE

Next Hearing

03rd April 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

37/2020

Filing Date

03-10-2020

Registration No

37/2020

Registration Date

03-10-2020

Court

TALUKA COURT, WANKANER

Judge

3-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDL. CJM

Acts & Sections

SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT, 1963 Section 34,39,

Petitioner(s)

Lt. VORA BAKIRBHAI TAHERALI NA VARASDAR VORA MURTUZABHAI BAKIRBHAI LAKADAVALA(Legal Heir)

Adv. M.F.BLOCH1.

vora mustufaabhai bakirbhai lakdavala

Respondent(s)

NILESHBHAI JAYSUKHBHAI RATHOD Advocate - P S SHAH

Hearing History

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

05-03-2026

PLAINTIFFS EVIDENCE

02-02-2026

PLAINTIFFS EVIDENCE

02-01-2026

PLAINTIFFS EVIDENCE

29-11-2025

PLAINTIFFS EVIDENCE

28-10-2025

PLAINTIFFS EVIDENCE

Interim Orders

12-07-2021
ORDER

Summary The plaintiff's application for temporary injunction to cancel a registered sale-deed was rejected by the court. The court found that the plaintiff lacked a prima facie case and balance of convenience was not in his favor, noting that the registered sale-deed (executed under the Indian Registration Act) takes precedence over the unregistered compromise agreement, and the plaintiff failed to come before the court with "clean hands" by selling property he claimed the government had acquired for road purposes. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The plaintiff's application for temporary injunction to cancel a registered sale-deed was rejected by the court. The court found that the plaintiff lacked a prima facie case and balance of convenience was not in his favor, noting that the registered sale-deed (executed under the Indian Registration Act) takes precedence over the unregistered compromise agreement, and the plaintiff failed to come before the court with "clean hands" by selling property he claimed the government had acquired for road purposes. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, WANKANER All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case