Shaikh Jabbar S/o Ratan Patel vs Moin S/o Sandu Patel Advocate - Nehri S.R. — 110/2024
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 38. Status: Order on Exh. Next hearing: 09th June 2026.
R.C.S. - Regular Civil Suit
CNR: MHAU100006592024
Next Hearing
09th June 2026
e-Filing Number
19-07-2024
Filing Number
229/2024
Filing Date
19-07-2024
Registration No
110/2024
Registration Date
19-07-2024
Court
Civil and Criminal Court, Khultabad
Judge
2-CIVIL JUDGE J.D. AND J.M.F.C., KHULTABAD.
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Shaikh Jabbar S/o Ratan Patel
Adv. Adv ishtiyaq ahemad patel
Respondent(s)
Moin S/o Sandu Patel Advocate - Nehri S.R.
Hearing History
Judge: 2-CIVIL JUDGE J.D. AND J.M.F.C., KHULTABAD.
Order on Exh
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
Argument on Exh.____Unready
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 29-04-2026 | Order on Exh |
| 06-04-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
| 12-03-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
| 18-02-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
| 27-01-2026 | Argument on Exh.____Unready |
Interim Orders
Case Summary: RCS No. 110/2024 (Jabbar v. Moin) The court rejected the defendants' application seeking dismissal of the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. The plaintiff's perpetual injunction suit regarding property in Dhamangao village was found to adequately disclose a cause of action, with proper documentation (registered sale-deed, mutation entry, 7/12 extract) and specific incident dates. The court held that possession and ownership disputes are matters of evidence, not grounds for dismissal at the pleading stage, and the defendants' arguments were deemed vague. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: RCS No. 110/2024 (Jabbar v. Moin) The court rejected the defendants' application seeking dismissal of the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. The plaintiff's perpetual injunction suit regarding property in Dhamangao village was found to adequately disclose a cause of action, with proper documentation (registered sale-deed, mutation entry, 7/12 extract) and specific incident dates. The court held that possession and ownership disputes are matters of evidence, not grounds for dismissal at the pleading stage, and the defendants' arguments were deemed vague. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts