HARESHBHARTHI BABUBHARTHI GAUSWAMI vs AARTIBA HARISCHANDRASINH URFE HARDIPSINH LAKSHMANSINH JADEJA Advocate - R B PANDYA — 15/2024

Case under Specific Relief Act, 1963 Section 31,34,37,. Status: HEARING ON INJUNCTION APPLICATION. Next hearing: 09th April 2026.

RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT

CNR: GJMR060000572024

HEARING ON INJUNCTION APPLICATION

Next Hearing

09th April 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

15/2024

Filing Date

18-01-2024

Registration No

15/2024

Registration Date

18-01-2024

Court

TALUKA COURT, HALVAD

Judge

33-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDL. CJM

Acts & Sections

SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT, 1963 Section 31,34,37,

Petitioner(s)

HARESHBHARTHI BABUBHARTHI GAUSWAMI

Adv. A V BHATT

Respondent(s)

AARTIBA HARISCHANDRASINH URFE HARDIPSINH LAKSHMANSINH JADEJA Advocate - R B PANDYA

RAJA URFE HARISHCHANDRASINH URFE HARDIPSINH LAKSHMANSINH JADEJA

LAKHDHIRSINH LAKSHMANSINH JADEJA

Hearing History

Judge: 33-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND ADDL. CJM

05-03-2026

HEARING ON INJUNCTION APPLICATION

19-02-2026

HEARING ON INJUNCTION APPLICATION

15-01-2026

HEARING ON INJUNCTION APPLICATION

11-12-2025

HEARING ON INJUNCTION APPLICATION

06-11-2025

HEARING ON INJUNCTION APPLICATION

Interim Orders

29-06-2024
ORDER
15-01-2026
ORDER

Summary The court granted the application filed under Order-I, Rule-10 of the CPC and allowed four parties—Bhavik Gopalbhai Surani, Mit Jagdishbhai Chhaniyara, Dharmadip Rameshbhai Oganja, and Kamleshbhai Ravjibhai Patel—to be joined as defendants (nos. 4, 5, 6, and 7) in the suit. These parties received sale deeds from the original Defendant No. 1 during the pendency of the suit and were found to be necessary parties to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and enable complete adjudication of the property dispute. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court granted the application filed under Order-I, Rule-10 of the CPC and allowed four parties—Bhavik Gopalbhai Surani, Mit Jagdishbhai Chhaniyara, Dharmadip Rameshbhai Oganja, and Kamleshbhai Ravjibhai Patel—to be joined as defendants (nos. 4, 5, 6, and 7) in the suit. These parties received sale deeds from the original Defendant No. 1 during the pendency of the suit and were found to be necessary parties to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and enable complete adjudication of the property dispute. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, HALVAD All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case