SUMANBEN SULUBHAI CHORYA vs BAPUBHAI GONDUBHAI GAVLI Advocate - U T MAHLA — 1/2020

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 151,. Status: PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE. Next hearing: 22nd April 2026.

RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT

CNR: GJNV070000052020

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

Next Hearing

22nd April 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

1/2020

Filing Date

23-01-2020

Registration No

1/2020

Registration Date

23-01-2020

Court

TALUKA COURT, AHWA

Judge

1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

Acts & Sections

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 Section 151,

Petitioner(s)

SUMANBEN SULUBHAI CHORYA

Adv. R.P.LAKHAN

Respondent(s)

BAPUBHAI GONDUBHAI GAVLI Advocate - U T MAHLA

KANCHANBEN BAPUBHAI GAVLI W/O BAPUBHAI

Adv. I.U.JADAV

MILANBEN BAPUBHAI

Adv. I.U.JADAV

SHITALBEN BAPUBHAI

Adv. I.U.JADAV

TINABEN BAPUBHAI W/O KIRANBHAI

Adv. I.U.JADAV

Hearing History

Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

01-04-2026

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

09-03-2026

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

07-02-2026

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

17-01-2026

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

24-12-2025

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

Interim Orders

11-10-2024
ORDER

Summary The court granted the plaintiff's application for interim injunction under Order 39, Rules 1 & 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The court restrained the defendants from interfering with the plaintiff's peaceful possession of disputed agricultural land (Survey No. 1311/2, Kotaba, Ahwa, Dang) and from creating any third-party rights over it until final disposal of the suit. The court found that the plaintiff had established a prima facie case based on 19 years of continuous possession, investments in land improvements, and documentary evidence of agreement with the original owner, and that the balance of convenience favored granting interim relief. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court granted the plaintiff's application for interim injunction under Order 39, Rules 1 & 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The court restrained the defendants from interfering with the plaintiff's peaceful possession of disputed agricultural land (Survey No. 1311/2, Kotaba, Ahwa, Dang) and from creating any third-party rights over it until final disposal of the suit. The court found that the plaintiff had established a prima facie case based on 19 years of continuous possession, investments in land improvements, and documentary evidence of agreement with the original owner, and that the balance of convenience favored granting interim relief. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, AHWA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case