Khatijabi Jafar Shaikh vs Naim Jafar Shaikh — 873/2025

Case under Specific Relief Act Section 38. Status: Argument on Exh.____Unready. Next hearing: 09th July 2026.

R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit

CNR: MHAU070071242025

Argument on Exh.____Unready

Next Hearing

09th July 2026

e-Filing Number

12-11-2025

Filing Number

5011/2025

Filing Date

20-11-2025

Registration No

873/2025

Registration Date

21-11-2025

Court

Civil and Criminal Court, Gangapur

Judge

6-JT. CIVIL JUDGE SENIOR DIVISION GANGAPUR

Acts & Sections

Specific Relief Act Section 38

Petitioner(s)

Khatijabi Jafar Shaikh

Adv. Dalvi S.K.

Respondent(s)

Naim Jafar Shaikh

Kayyum Jafar Shaikh

Fayyum Jafar Shaikh

Mangalbai Raghunath Lembe

Hearing History

Judge: 6-JT. CIVIL JUDGE SENIOR DIVISION GANGAPUR

27-04-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

12-03-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

26-02-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

18-02-2026

Argument on Exh.____Unready

10-02-2026

Order

Interim Orders

18-02-2026
Order on Exhibit

Case 873/2025 Summary: The defendants' application to reject the plaint under Order VII Rule 11(b) and (f) of the Civil Procedure Code was rejected. The court held that the suit, which seeks partition, separate possession, and declaration that a sale deed dated 03.07.2024 is non-binding, was properly instituted and the court fee was properly paid. Although the plaintiff (not being a party to the sale deed) sought relief under partition concepts unfamiliar to Muslim law, the court found no statutory ground for rejection and ruled that improper legal framing alone does not justify dismissal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case 873/2025 Summary: The defendants' application to reject the plaint under Order VII Rule 11(b) and (f) of the Civil Procedure Code was rejected. The court held that the suit, which seeks partition, separate possession, and declaration that a sale deed dated 03.07.2024 is non-binding, was properly instituted and the court fee was properly paid. Although the plaintiff (not being a party to the sale deed) sought relief under partition concepts unfamiliar to Muslim law, the court found no statutory ground for rejection and ruled that improper legal framing alone does not justify dismissal. 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

Civil and Criminal Court, Gangapur All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case