KISHNARAM ETC vs DEDARAM ETC Advocate - PREM KUMAR PRAJAPAT — 48/2025

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section O 39 R 1 & 2. Disposed: Contested--Allowed otherwise on 11th May 2026.

Civil Misc. Connected (41) - CIVIL MISC (C)

CNR: RJBM010017512025

Case disposed

Filing Number

389/2025

Filing Date

08-10-2025

Registration No

48/2025

Registration Date

08-10-2025

Court

DJ ADJ-Barmer District HQ

Judge

3-District Judge

Decision Date

11th May 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Allowed otherwise

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section O 39 R 1 & 2

Petitioner(s)

KISHNARAM ETC

Adv. HARISH SONI

GULAB

champa

mumal

Respondent(s)

DEDARAM ETC Advocate - PREM KUMAR PRAJAPAT

mota

nakhta ke kayam mukam virmaram

chunaram

ganga devi

nathu

smt antari devi

dhudi devi

up panjiyak vishala

Hearing History

Judge: 3-District Judge

11-05-2026

Disposed

08-05-2026

Arguments on Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings

25-04-2026

Arguments on Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings

20-04-2026

Arguments on Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings

16-04-2026

Arguments on Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings

Final Orders / Judgements

11-05-2026
Judgement

The District Judge of Barmer (Rajasthan) partially granted the petitioner Kishanaram's request for a temporary injunction under Order 39 Rules 1-2 and Section 151 CPC. The court held that the disputed agricultural land is the ancestral property of the petitioner and respondents 1-5, and the petitioner has made out a prima facie case for maintaining the status quo of the land record until the main case is decided. The court ordered that the respondents shall maintain the land record in its original state and shall not create further complications regarding the property partition. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The District Judge of Barmer (Rajasthan) partially granted the petitioner Kishanaram's request for a temporary injunction under Order 39 Rules 1-2 and Section 151 CPC. The court held that the disputed agricultural land is the ancestral property of the petitioner and respondents 1-5, and the petitioner has made out a prima facie case for maintaining the status quo of the land record until the main case is decided. The court ordered that the respondents shall maintain the land record in its original state and shall not create further complications regarding the property partition. 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

DJ ADJ-Barmer District HQ All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case