Ramchandar vs Radhey Shyam Sunar Advocate - Sh. Koushal Bhardwaj — 322/2015

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section CPC. Disposed: Contested--Dismissed after Full Trial/Hearing on 30th March 2026.

C S - Civil Suit

CNR: RJAL240002162015

Case disposed

Filing Number

612/2015

Filing Date

21-07-2015

Registration No

322/2015

Registration Date

21-07-2015

Court

CJ JD Thanagazi

Judge

1-Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate

Decision Date

30th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Dismissed after Full Trial/Hearing

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section CPC

Petitioner(s)

Ramchandar

Adv. Sh. Ramkaran Chopra

Respondent(s)

Radhey Shyam Sunar Advocate - Sh. Koushal Bhardwaj

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate

30-03-2026

Disposed

28-03-2026

Reply of Application/ Steps by parties

24-03-2026

Reply of Application/ Steps by parties

23-03-2026

Reply of Application/ Steps by parties

19-03-2026

Reply of Application/ Steps by parties

Final Orders / Judgements

30-03-2026
Judgement

Case Summary Case 322/2015 - Ramchandar v. Radhey Shyam Sunar Advocate & Others The court dismissed petitioner Ramchandar's suit seeking a permanent injunction against respondents from opening a door/access on the north side of their shop and purchased land adjoining his residential property. The court found that the petitioner failed to prove the disputed road was his private property—government records showed it was a public road constructed and maintained by the village panchayat. Since the respondents' property has a legitimate right to northern access and the road is public, they cannot be restrained from using it. The petitioner's case collapsed due to insufficient evidence and self-contradictions in witness testimony regarding ownership. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary Case 322/2015 - Ramchandar v. Radhey Shyam Sunar Advocate & Others The court dismissed petitioner Ramchandar's suit seeking a permanent injunction against respondents from opening a door/access on the north side of their shop and purchased land adjoining his residential property. The court found that the petitioner failed to prove the disputed road was his private property—government records showed it was a public road constructed and maintained by the village panchayat. Since the respondents' property has a legitimate right to northern access and the road is public, they cannot be restrained from using it. The petitioner's case collapsed due to insufficient evidence and self-contradictions in witness testimony regarding ownership. 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

CJ JD Thanagazi All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case