RAMESHBHAI MAFATBHAI VASAVA vs DIPAKKUMAR NAVNITLAL SHAH — 58/2025
Case under Specific Relief Act, 1963 Section 34,38,. Status: PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE. Next hearing: 03rd April 2026.
RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT
CNR: GJSR050019182025
Next Hearing
03rd April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
58/2025
Filing Date
24-06-2025
Registration No
58/2025
Registration Date
24-06-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, MANGROL
Judge
3-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
RAMESHBHAI MAFATBHAI VASAVA
Adv. Y A LUNAT
GANPATBHAI MAFATBHAI VASAVA
SUDHABEN MAFATBHAI VASAVA W/O DINESHBHAI VASAVA
RANJANBEN MAFATBHAI VASAVA W/O MANHARBHAI VASAVA
Respondent(s)
DIPAKKUMAR NAVNITLAL SHAH
SANJAYLAL RAMESHLAL SHAH
HINABEN DIPAKKUMAR SHAH
MAITRI DIPAKKUMAR SHAH
XANIL DIPAKKUMAR SHAH
Hearing History
Judge: 3-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
HEARING ON INJUNCTION APPLICATION
HEARING ON INJUNCTION APPLICATION
HEARING ON INJUNCTION APPLICATION
HEARING ON INJUNCTION APPLICATION
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 06-03-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE | |
| 27-02-2026 | HEARING ON INJUNCTION APPLICATION | |
| 09-02-2026 | HEARING ON INJUNCTION APPLICATION | |
| 21-01-2026 | HEARING ON INJUNCTION APPLICATION | |
| 23-12-2025 | HEARING ON INJUNCTION APPLICATION |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: The petition filed by the plaintiff regarding disputed agricultural property in Nanda village, Mangarol, Gujarat has been dismissed. The court found that the plaintiff failed to provide sufficient documentary evidence proving that the defendants' father gifted the property to the plaintiff's father, and the plaintiff could not establish the purchase price or conditions of the alleged transfer. Consequently, the court rejected the plaintiff's interim application and ordered costs to be determined upon final judgment conclusion. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: The petition filed by the plaintiff regarding disputed agricultural property in Nanda village, Mangarol, Gujarat has been dismissed. The court found that the plaintiff failed to provide sufficient documentary evidence proving that the defendants' father gifted the property to the plaintiff's father, and the plaintiff could not establish the purchase price or conditions of the alleged transfer. Consequently, the court rejected the plaintiff's interim application and ordered costs to be determined upon final judgment conclusion. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts