Smt. JAITUNI vs ALIMAL Advocate - SAHALINDRA BHARGAVA — 12/2016
Case under 163-A Section CIVILMISC.APPEAL. Disposed: Contested--Dismissed after Full Trial/Hearing on 17th March 2026.
C.m.appl. - Civil Misc.Appeal
CNR: RJAL010001172016
Filing Number
71/2016
Filing Date
16-01-2016
Registration No
12/2016
Registration Date
18-01-2016
Court
DJ ADJ Alwar District HQ
Judge
6-Additional District and Sessions Judge No 04
Decision Date
17th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Dismissed after Full Trial/Hearing
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Smt. JAITUNI
Adv. DINESH KUMAR YADAV
Respondent(s)
ALIMAL Advocate - SAHALINDRA BHARGAVA
Hearing History
Judge: 6-Additional District and Sessions Judge No 04
Disposed
Final arguments
Final arguments
Final arguments
Arguments on Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 17-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 16-03-2026 | Final arguments |
| 13-03-2026 | Final arguments |
| 09-03-2026 | Final arguments |
| 15-12-2025 | Arguments on Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary Case 12/2016 - Smt. Jaituni v. Alimani The Rajasthan High Court upheld a lower court's order regarding disputed agricultural land (Plot Nos. 110 and 111, totaling 2 acres 1 hectare 49 acres in Gram Itrana). The appellants argued they held inheritance rights under Muslim law (2/3 share for daughters and 1/3 for sons), while respondents claimed superior ownership based on original cultivation rights. The court found the appellants had not established prima facie ownership and maintained the status quo, directing them not to alienate the property or create encumbrances. The appeal was dismissed with the lower court's decision dated 15.12.2015 upheld without legal defect. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary Case 12/2016 - Smt. Jaituni v. Alimani The Rajasthan High Court upheld a lower court's order regarding disputed agricultural land (Plot Nos. 110 and 111, totaling 2 acres 1 hectare 49 acres in Gram Itrana). The appellants argued they held inheritance rights under Muslim law (2/3 share for daughters and 1/3 for sons), while respondents claimed superior ownership based on original cultivation rights. The court found the appellants had not established prima facie ownership and maintained the status quo, directing them not to alienate the property or create encumbrances. The appeal was dismissed with the lower court's decision dated 15.12.2015 upheld without legal defect. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts