Jadav Sangram S/o Late. Jadav Cheniya, Age 67 yrs, R/o Ramchandrapuram, Dist Medak. TS vs Suresh Jadava S/o Sangram Jadav, Age 46 yrs, R/o Patighanpur, Dist Sangareddy. TS — 74/2024

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 7. Status: EVIDENCE. Next hearing: 21st July 2026.

O.S. - Original Suit

CNR: KAKB410002232024

EVIDENCE

Next Hearing

21st July 2026

Filing Number

74/2024

Filing Date

27-06-2024

Registration No

74/2024

Registration Date

27-06-2024

Court

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHINCHOLI

Judge

828-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,Chincholi

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 7

Petitioner(s)

Jadav Sangram S/o Late. Jadav Cheniya, Age 67 yrs, R/o Ramchandrapuram, Dist Medak. TS

Adv. B.SUDARSHAN

Respondent(s)

Suresh Jadava S/o Sangram Jadav, Age 46 yrs, R/o Patighanpur, Dist Sangareddy. TS

Hearing History

Judge: 828-SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC,Chincholi

04-06-2026

EVIDENCE

15-04-2026

ISSUES.

13-03-2026

SUMMONS

03-03-2026

SUMMONS

17-02-2026

SUMMONS

Interim Orders

28-06-2024
Orders
19-08-2025
Deposition
13-03-2026
Orders

Case Summary: OS No. 74/2024 Outcome: Temporary injunction application GRANTED. The court restrained the defendant from alienating agricultural property pending trial. The plaintiff (67-year-old father) alleged the defendant (46-year-old son) fraudulently obtained a gift deed while the plaintiff was ill, then mutated the property in his own name. The defendant claimed the gift was voluntary. Finding the plaintiff established a prima facie case of fraud, balance of convenience favoring him, and irreparable harm if injunction denied, the court prohibited property alienation until suit disposal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: OS No. 74/2024 Outcome: Temporary injunction application GRANTED. The court restrained the defendant from alienating agricultural property pending trial. The plaintiff (67-year-old father) alleged the defendant (46-year-old son) fraudulently obtained a gift deed while the plaintiff was ill, then mutated the property in his own name. The defendant claimed the gift was voluntary. Finding the plaintiff established a prima facie case of fraud, balance of convenience favoring him, and irreparable harm if injunction denied, the court prohibited property alienation until suit disposal. 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

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, CHINCHOLI All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case