BHANWAR KHAN vs MOHAMMAD SADIK ETC. Advocate - SURENDRA MOHAN VERMA — 24/2026

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section O39,R1,R2. Disposed: Contested--Allowed / Granted after Full Trial / Hearing on 08th May 2026.

Case disposed

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

CNR: RJHG130000532026

Filing Number

55/2026

Filing Date

10-Mar-2026

Registration No

24/2026

Registration Date

10-Mar-2026

Court

CJ JD RAWATSAR HQ

Judge

1-CIVIL Judge And Jm

Decision Date

08-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Allowed / Granted after Full Trial / Hearing

Last updated 29-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section O39,R1,R2

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.BHANWAR KHAN

    Adv. JITENDRA SINGH JODHA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.MOHAMMAD SADIK ETC. Advocate - SURENDRA MOHAN VERMA

  2. 2.Majid khan

    Adv. KAMLESH PANDEY

  3. 3.Gunni Bano

  4. 4.Jubeda

  5. 5.Meena Tak

  6. 6.Sahida bano

  7. 7.Madina

  8. 8.Mumtaj bano

    Adv. KAMLESH PANDEY

  9. 9.Kiran

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 08-May-2026

    Order

    Case Summary: Bhanwar Khan v. Mohammad Sadik (24/2026) The Judicial Magistrate of Rawatsar granted a temporary injunction in favor of petitioner Bhanwar Khan against respondents Mohammad Sadik and Meed Khan. The court found that Bhanwar Khan established a prima facie case showing the disputed 500-bigha land parcel was purchased by his late father Inayat Ali through a registered deed of sale (Baiynama) dated 05.09.1963, and that the petitioner possesses 1/8 share in the property. The court determined that respondent Mohammad Sadik obtained an ex-parte decree dated 16.10.2025 based on an unregistered agreement (Ikaarnama), which cannot supersede the registered Baiynama. Balancing the convenience and irreparable harm, the court restrained respondents from evicting the petitioner or mortgaging the property pending final adjudication. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 08-May-2026

    Disposed

    CIVIL Judge And Jm

  4. 01-May-2026

    Arguments on Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings

    CIVIL Judge And Jm

  5. 23-Apr-2026

    Arguments on Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings

    CIVIL Judge And Jm

  6. 13-Apr-2026

    Arguments on Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings

    CIVIL Judge And Jm

  7. 09-Apr-2026

    Arguments on Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings

    CIVIL Judge And Jm

  8. 02-Apr-2026

    Arguments on Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings

    CIVIL Judge And Jm

  9. 01-Apr-2026

    Arguments on Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings

    CIVIL Judge And Jm

  10. 24-Mar-2026

    Reply of Application/ Steps by parties

    CIVIL Judge And Jm

  11. 23-Mar-2026

    Reply of Application/ Steps by parties

    CIVIL Judge And Jm

  12. 17-Mar-2026

    Reply of Application/ Steps by parties

    CIVIL Judge And Jm

  13. 13-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  14. 10-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 24/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: Bhanwar Khan v. Mohammad Sadik (24/2026) The Judicial Magistrate of Rawatsar granted a temporary injunction in favor of petitioner Bhanwar Khan against respondents Mohammad Sadik and Meed Khan. The court found that Bhanwar Khan established a prima facie case showing the disputed 500-bigha land parcel was purchased by his late father Inayat Ali through a registered deed of sale (Baiynama) dated 05.09.1963, and that the petitioner possesses 1/8 share in the property. The court determined that respondent Mohammad Sadik obtained an ex-parte decree dated 16.10.2025 based on an unregistered agreement (Ikaarnama), which cannot supersede the registered Baiynama. Balancing the convenience and irreparable harm, the court restrained respondents from evicting the petitioner or mortgaging the property pending final adjudication. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case