Mahaveer Chand Parakh vs Ashok Kumar etc. — 26/2022
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section O 7 R 1. Disposed: Contested--Decreed after Full Trial on 25th March 2026.
Civil Suit
CNR: RJBK230003252022
Filing Number
26/2022
Filing Date
05-Nov-2015
Registration No
26/2022
Registration Date
05-Nov-2015
Court
ADJ Nokha Taluka HQ
Judge
1-ADJ Nokha
Decision Date
25-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Decreed after Full Trial
Last updated 31-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Mahaveer Chand Parakh
Adv. Kedarnath Soni
Respondent(s)
-
1.Ashok Kumar etc.
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
25-Mar-2026
JudgementView PDF
Summary of Case 26/2022: Mahaveer Chand Parakh v. Ashok Kumar and Others Court: Additional District Judge, Nokha, Bikaner District (Rajasthan) Decision Date: 25.03.2026 Court's Decision The court ALLOWED the plaintiff's suit for declaration of ownership and recovery of possession with permanent injunction against the defendants. Key Findings 1. Ownership Established: The court declared that Mahaveer Chand Parakh (plaintiff) is the lawful owner of the disputed property (Plot No. 737, measuring 800 sq. yards) through a registered sale deed dated 01.02.2011. 2. Chain of Ownership Validated: The court traced and validated the complete chain of transactions: - Original property holder Ramzan gifted it to wife Salman - Salman sold it to Gulzari in 1974 - Gulzari sold to Kalusram and Anwar in 2007 - They subdivided and sold western portion (800 sq. yards) to Ashok Kumar in 2010 - Ashok Kumar sold to plaintiff in 2011 3. Defendant's Transactions Voided: Transactions by Defendant No. 4 (Banwarilal) claiming to sell disputed property to Defendants 5 and 6 on 24.05.2016 were declared null and void as he had no valid authority—Mahabub (whose sale deed was questioned) was never the legitimate owner. 4. Possession Restored: Plaintiff is entitled to physical possession of the disputed property and its recovery from all illegal occupants. 5. Perpetual Injunction: Defendants are restrained from transferring or encumbering the property in any manner. Costs: Each party bears their own expenses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
25-Mar-2026
Disposed
ADJ Nokha
-
23-Mar-2026
Final arguments
ADJ Nokha
-
19-Mar-2026
Final arguments
ADJ Nokha
-
17-Mar-2026
Final arguments
ADJ Nokha
-
13-Mar-2026
Final arguments
ADJ Nokha
-
10-Mar-2026
Final arguments
ADJ Nokha
-
06-Mar-2026
Final arguments
ADJ Nokha
-
05-Mar-2026
Final arguments
ADJ Nokha
-
04-Mar-2026
Final arguments
ADJ Nokha
-
23-Feb-2026
Final arguments
ADJ Nokha
-
13-Feb-2026
Final arguments
ADJ Nokha
-
07-Feb-2026
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
30-Jan-2026
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
22-Jan-2026
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
09-Jan-2026
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
19-Dec-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
05-Dec-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
26-Nov-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
14-Nov-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
07-Nov-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
31-Oct-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
17-Oct-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
10-Oct-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
03-Oct-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
29-Sep-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
20-Sep-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
12-Sep-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
08-Sep-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
22-Aug-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
08-Aug-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
05-Aug-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
24-Jul-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
17-Jul-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
08-Jul-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
30-May-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
23-May-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
16-May-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
12-May-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
02-May-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
24-Apr-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
19-Apr-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
04-Apr-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
21-Mar-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
19-Mar-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
28-Feb-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
19-Feb-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
18-Feb-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
17-Feb-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
13-Feb-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
07-Feb-2025
Plaintiff Evidence
ADJ Nokha
-
13-Dec-2024
Issues
ADJ Nokha
-
27-Sep-2024
Issues
ADJ Nokha
-
23-Aug-2024
Reply of Application/ Steps by parties
ADJ Nokha
-
12-Jul-2024
Reply of Application/ Steps by parties
ADJ Nokha
-
26-Apr-2024
Reply of Application/ Steps by parties
ADJ Nokha
-
15-Mar-2024
Reply of Application/ Steps by parties
ADJ Nokha
-
02-Feb-2024
Reply of Application/ Steps by parties
ADJ Nokha
-
08-Dec-2023
Reply of Application/ Steps by parties
ADJ Nokha
-
20-Oct-2023
Issues
ADJ Nokha
-
08-Sep-2023
Issues
ADJ Nokha
-
08-Aug-2023
Issues
ADJ Nokha
-
31-May-2023
Issues
ADJ Nokha
-
25-May-2023
Issues
ADJ Nokha
-
18-Mar-2023
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
05-Nov-2015
Case filed
Registration No. 26/2022
Summary of Case 26/2022: Mahaveer Chand Parakh v. Ashok Kumar and Others Court: Additional District Judge, Nokha, Bikaner District (Rajasthan) Decision Date: 25.03.2026 Court's Decision The court ALLOWED the plaintiff's suit for declaration of ownership and recovery of possession with permanent injunction against the defendants. Key Findings 1. Ownership Established: The court declared that Mahaveer Chand Parakh (plaintiff) is the lawful owner of the disputed property (Plot No. 737, measuring 800 sq. yards) through a registered sale deed dated 01.02.2011. 2. Chain of Ownership Validated: The court traced and validated the complete chain of transactions: - Original property holder Ramzan gifted it to wife Salman - Salman sold it to Gulzari in 1974 - Gulzari sold to Kalusram and Anwar in 2007 - They subdivided and sold western portion (800 sq. yards) to Ashok Kumar in 2010 - Ashok Kumar sold to plaintiff in 2011 3. Defendant's Transactions Voided: Transactions by Defendant No. 4 (Banwarilal) claiming to sell disputed property to Defendants 5 and 6 on 24.05.2016 were declared null and void as he had no valid authority—Mahabub (whose sale deed was questioned) was never the legitimate owner. 4. Possession Restored: Plaintiff is entitled to physical possession of the disputed property and its recovery from all illegal occupants. 5. Perpetual Injunction: Defendants are restrained from transferring or encumbering the property in any manner. Costs: Each party bears their own expenses. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts