Sureshchand vs Gram vikas adhikari — 3/2023
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section o7 r1. Disposed: Contested--Decreed Ex-Parte on 06th May 2026.
Civil Suit
CNR: RJDH150000032023
Filing Number
3/2023
Filing Date
10-03-2023
Registration No
3/2023
Registration Date
10-03-2023
Court
CJ JD Saipau Taluka
Judge
1-Civil Judge and JM
Decision Date
06th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Decreed Ex-Parte
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Sureshchand
Adv. Deepak sharma
Respondent(s)
Gram vikas adhikari
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Civil Judge and JM
Disposed
Orders
Plaintiff Evidence
Plaintiff Evidence
Plaintiff Evidence
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-05-2026 | Disposed |
| 22-04-2026 | Orders |
| 25-03-2026 | Plaintiff Evidence |
| 13-03-2026 | Plaintiff Evidence |
| 11-03-2026 | Plaintiff Evidence |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The Civil Judge of Dholpur, Rajasthan granted a permanent injunction in favor of the plaintiffs (Sureshchandra and others) against the defendants (Village Development Officer and Tahsildar). The court prohibited the defendants from constructing any road or depositing soil on the plaintiffs' inherited agricultural land (khesra nos. 2716 and 2717, totaling ~0.57 hectares) without their consent, and restrained them from interfering with the plaintiffs' use and enjoyment of the property. The decision was based on the plaintiffs' established ownership through inheritance and their testimony that the defendants were unlawfully encroaching on their land boundary. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Decision Summary The Civil Judge of Dholpur, Rajasthan granted a permanent injunction in favor of the plaintiffs (Sureshchandra and others) against the defendants (Village Development Officer and Tahsildar). The court prohibited the defendants from constructing any road or depositing soil on the plaintiffs' inherited agricultural land (khesra nos. 2716 and 2717, totaling ~0.57 hectares) without their consent, and restrained them from interfering with the plaintiffs' use and enjoyment of the property. The decision was based on the plaintiffs' established ownership through inheritance and their testimony that the defendants were unlawfully encroaching on their land boundary. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts