RADHAYSHYAM vs RAMCHANDER AND ORS Advocate - SH. NARPAL SINGH YADAV — 57/2019
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section CPC. Disposed: Contested--Dismissed after Full Trial/Hearing on 12th March 2026.
Civil Regular Appeal - CIVIL REG. APPEAL
CNR: RJJH060010112019
Filing Number
422/2019
Filing Date
12-09-2019
Registration No
57/2019
Registration Date
12-09-2019
Court
ADJ Khetri Taluka HQ
Judge
1-ADJ I
Decision Date
12th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Dismissed after Full Trial/Hearing
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
RADHAYSHYAM
Adv. SH. MUKESH KUMAR SHARMA
Respondent(s)
RAMCHANDER AND ORS Advocate - SH. NARPAL SINGH YADAV
PREM DEVI
RAJVEER
Hearing History
Judge: 1-ADJ I
Disposed
Final arguments
Final arguments
Final arguments
Final arguments
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 12-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 09-03-2026 | Final arguments |
| 25-02-2026 | Final arguments |
| 17-02-2026 | Final arguments |
| 12-02-2026 | Final arguments |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: Civil Regular Appeal 57/2019 Court: District Court, Khetri, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan Parties: Radhayshyam (Appellant) v. Ramchander and Others (Respondents) Decision Date: March 12, 2026 Summary The appellate court dismissed Radhayshyam's appeal against the lower court's rejection of his petition for permanent injunction and declaratory relief regarding disputed agricultural land in village Singhana. The court found that Radhayshyam failed to prove clear ownership/possession of the disputed property through credible documentary or oral evidence. His statement regarding the extent and boundaries of the land was self-contradictory (claiming both 1,430 and 1,750 square yards). The court upheld the trial judge's decision, applying the principle that a plaintiff disputing title must establish ownership through proper evidence, and cannot obtain injunction without proving valid possession or title. The appeal was dismissed with each party bearing its own costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Civil Regular Appeal 57/2019 Court: District Court, Khetri, Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan Parties: Radhayshyam (Appellant) v. Ramchander and Others (Respondents) Decision Date: March 12, 2026 Summary The appellate court dismissed Radhayshyam's appeal against the lower court's rejection of his petition for permanent injunction and declaratory relief regarding disputed agricultural land in village Singhana. The court found that Radhayshyam failed to prove clear ownership/possession of the disputed property through credible documentary or oral evidence. His statement regarding the extent and boundaries of the land was self-contradictory (claiming both 1,430 and 1,750 square yards). The court upheld the trial judge's decision, applying the principle that a plaintiff disputing title must establish ownership through proper evidence, and cannot obtain injunction without proving valid possession or title. The appeal was dismissed with each party bearing its own costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts