Heirs of Ishwarbhai Chhibabhai Solanki(Legal Heir) vs Sarpanchshree Advocate - J A PATEL — 16/2009
Case under Specific Relief Act, 1963 Section 006,038,. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 13th March 2026.
RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT
CNR: GJNV040000172009
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
16/2009
Filing Date
19-02-2009
Registration No
16/2009
Registration Date
19-02-2009
Court
TALUKA COURT, BANSDA
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
13th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Heirs of Ishwarbhai Chhibabhai Solanki(Legal Heir)
Adv. M S BHAVSAR1.
REKHABEN WD/O ISHAVARBHAI PARMARA 1.
KUNAL ISHAVARBHAI PARMAR 1.
TEJAL ISHAVARBHAI PARMAR 1.
DAMAYANTIBEN WD/O ISHAVARBHAI PARMAR(SECOND WIFE)
Respondent(s)
Sarpanchshree Advocate - J A PATEL
Talati Cum Mantry Shri
Nathubhai Mangabhai Patel(Legal Heir) 3.
NANUBEN WD/O NATHUBHAI PATEL 3.
MINABEN NATHUBHAI PATEL W/O ISHVABHAI PATEL 3.
ASHOKBHAI NATHUBHAI PATEL 3.
HEIRS OF PRAKASHBHAI NATHUBHAI PATEL(Legal Heir) 3.
SUNILBHAI NATHUBHAI PATEL
Bhikhubhai Mangabhai Patel
Govindbhai Chhibabhai Solanki
Chanchalben d/o Chhibabhai Hansiyabhai w/o Ketanbhai Ukabhai Parmar
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
JUDGEMENT
JUDGEMENT
JUDGEMENT
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 13-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 10-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT | |
| 09-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT | |
| 06-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT | |
| 20-02-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The court dismissed the plaintiff's suit for perpetual injunction against defendants seeking to restrain alleged illegal occupation of agricultural land (Survey No. 736/1) in Singhai village. The court found that defendants Nos. 3 & 4 had acquired title to the disputed land through adverse possession, having maintained continuous, open, and uninterrupted possession since around 1940 with the knowledge of the plaintiff's father, who never objected. The suit was further barred by the law of limitation (filed 19 years after the cause of action arose in 1990) and by statutory requirements under the Gujarat Panchayat Act. The court partially allowed defendants' counter-claim, declaring them owners of the land under the principle of adverse possession. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The court dismissed the plaintiff's suit for perpetual injunction against defendants seeking to restrain alleged illegal occupation of agricultural land (Survey No. 736/1) in Singhai village. The court found that defendants Nos. 3 & 4 had acquired title to the disputed land through adverse possession, having maintained continuous, open, and uninterrupted possession since around 1940 with the knowledge of the plaintiff's father, who never objected. The suit was further barred by the law of limitation (filed 19 years after the cause of action arose in 1990) and by statutory requirements under the Gujarat Panchayat Act. The court partially allowed defendants' counter-claim, declaring them owners of the land under the principle of adverse possession. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts