LATE ISHARIBEN KATAKIYABHAI DASHRIYABHAI GAMITS DAUGHTER(Legal Heir) vs RAMSINGBHAI BAVABHAI GAMIT Advocate - S M GAMIT — 6/2025

Case under Specific Relief Act, 1963 Section 38,. Status: PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE. Next hearing: 18th March 2026.

RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT

CNR: GJTP050003382025

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

Next Hearing

18th March 2026

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

6/2025

Filing Date

29-03-2025

Registration No

6/2025

Registration Date

29-03-2025

Court

TALUKA COURT, UCHCHHAL

Judge

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

Acts & Sections

SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT, 1963 Section 38,

Petitioner(s)

LATE ISHARIBEN KATAKIYABHAI DASHRIYABHAI GAMITS DAUGHTER(Legal Heir)

Adv. C D KHAIRE1.

ARJUNBHAI POSALIYABHAI GAMIT

BABLIMARD RAVAJIBHAI GAMITS WIFE

Respondent(s)

RAMSINGBHAI BAVABHAI GAMIT Advocate - S M GAMIT

RAKESHBHAI RAMSINGBHAI GAMIT

VIRUBEN RAMSINGBHAI BAVABHAIS WIFE

Hearing History

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

05-03-2026

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

09-02-2026

HEARING ON INJUNCTION APPLICATION

30-01-2026

HEARING ON INJUNCTION APPLICATION

12-01-2026

HEARING ON INJUNCTION APPLICATION

18-12-2025

FOR COUNTER AFFIDAVIT

Interim Orders

05-03-2026
ORDER

Case Summary The court granted the plaintiffs' petition for mandatory injunction. The court ordered that defendants must not interfere with the plaintiffs' agricultural activities on their respective land shares and must allow plaintiffs exclusive possession and cultivation rights pending final disposal of the case. The court also directed that costs of the interim relief be borne by the defendants. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary The court granted the plaintiffs' petition for mandatory injunction. The court ordered that defendants must not interfere with the plaintiffs' agricultural activities on their respective land shares and must allow plaintiffs exclusive possession and cultivation rights pending final disposal of the case. The court also directed that costs of the interim relief be borne by the defendants. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, UCHCHHAL All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case