TEJABHAI VAGHABHAI TOLIYA vs MANISHKUMAR KAUSHIKBHAI PATEL Advocate - J H MASTER — 78/2025
Case under Specific Relief Act, 1963 Section 34,38,. Status: FINAL ARGUMENTS. Next hearing: 21st April 2026.
RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT
CNR: GJSR050026102025
Next Hearing
21st April 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
78/2025
Filing Date
24-07-2025
Registration No
78/2025
Registration Date
24-07-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, MANGROL
Judge
3-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
TEJABHAI VAGHABHAI TOLIYA
Adv. A G PATEL
Respondent(s)
MANISHKUMAR KAUSHIKBHAI PATEL Advocate - J H MASTER
KAUSHIKBHAI CHANDUBHAI PATEL
Adv. J H MASTER
Hearing History
Judge: 3-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
FINAL ARGUMENTS
FINAL ARGUMENTS
DEFENDANT EVIDENCE
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 13-04-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS | |
| 23-03-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS | |
| 09-03-2026 | DEFENDANT EVIDENCE | |
| 05-03-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE | |
| 26-02-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE |
Interim Orders
Summary Case RCS 78-2025 | Mangarol Civil Court, Surat | Dated 10 December 2025 The court partially granted the plaintiff's interim relief application. The court ordered both parties to maintain the status quo regarding the disputed agricultural land until final judgment in the main suit. The plaintiff's claim under a 30-year sharecropping agreement with defendant No. 1 was found prima facie credible based on documentary evidence (deed and agreement documents), and the court restrained the defendants from taking unlawful action to dispossess the plaintiff from the land during the litigation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary Case RCS 78-2025 | Mangarol Civil Court, Surat | Dated 10 December 2025 The court partially granted the plaintiff's interim relief application. The court ordered both parties to maintain the status quo regarding the disputed agricultural land until final judgment in the main suit. The plaintiff's claim under a 30-year sharecropping agreement with defendant No. 1 was found prima facie credible based on documentary evidence (deed and agreement documents), and the court restrained the defendants from taking unlawful action to dispossess the plaintiff from the land during the litigation. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts