Birbal vs Nandlal Advocate - Shri Ashok Kumar Jangir — 13/2024

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section cpc. Status: Plaintiff Evidence. Next hearing: 01st July 2026.

Plaintiff Evidence Next hearing 01-Jul-2026 this date has passed

Civil Suit

CNR: RJJH140002432024

Filing Number

30/2024

Filing Date

06-May-2024

Registration No

13/2024

Registration Date

06-May-2024

Court

Gram Nayayalaya Nawalgarh

Judge

1-Nyayadhikari

Last updated 27-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section cpc

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Birbal

    Adv. Shri Kishor Kumar Jangir

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Nandlal Advocate - Shri Ashok Kumar Jangir

  2. 2.rajkumar

Case History

  1. 01-Jul-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 20-May-2026

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Nyayadhikari

  3. 07-May-2026

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Nyayadhikari

  4. 21-Apr-2026

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Nyayadhikari

  5. 01-Apr-2026

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Nyayadhikari

  6. 12-Mar-2026

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Nyayadhikari

  7. 25-Feb-2026

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Nyayadhikari

  8. 12-Feb-2026

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Nyayadhikari

  9. 29-Jan-2026

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Nyayadhikari

  10. 13-Jan-2026

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Nyayadhikari

  11. 20-Dec-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Nyayadhikari

  12. 02-Dec-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Nyayadhikari

  13. 20-Nov-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Nyayadhikari

  14. 07-Nov-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Nyayadhikari

  15. 15-Oct-2025

    JudgementView PDF

    Summary of Case 13/2024 - Birbal v. Nandlal Advocate Outcome: The court granted a temporary injunction in favor of petitioner Birbal against respondents Nandlal Advocate (Shri Ashok Kumar Jangir) and Rajkumar. The respondents are restrained from interfering with the disputed agricultural land pending final judgment in the main case. The court found that petitioner established a prima facie case regarding property rights and that the balance of convenience favors protecting the property status quo. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  16. 15-Oct-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Nyayadhikari

  17. 24-Sep-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Nyayadhikari

  18. 06-Sep-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Nyayadhikari

  19. 19-Aug-2025

    Plaintiff Evidence

    Nyayadhikari

  20. 19-Jul-2025

    Issues

    Nyayadhikari

  21. 30-Jun-2025

    Issues

    Nyayadhikari

  22. 30-May-2025

    Issues

    Nyayadhikari

  23. 16-May-2025

    Issues

    Nyayadhikari

  24. 25-Apr-2025

    Issues

    Nyayadhikari

  25. 05-Apr-2025

    Issues

    Nyayadhikari

  26. 15-Mar-2025

    Reply of Application/ Steps by parties

    Nyayadhikari

  27. 14-Feb-2025

    Reply of Application/ Steps by parties

    Nyayadhikari

  28. 21-Jan-2025

    Reply of Application/ Steps by parties

    Nyayadhikari

  29. 03-Jan-2025

    Reply of Application/ Steps by parties

    Nyayadhikari

  30. 04-Dec-2024

    Reply of Application/ Steps by parties

    Nyayadhikari

  31. 14-Nov-2024

    Reply of Application/ Steps by parties

    Nyayadhikari

  32. 21-Oct-2024

    Reply of Application/ Steps by parties

    Nyayadhikari

  33. 24-Sep-2024

    Reply of Application/ Steps by parties

    Nyayadhikari

  34. 28-Aug-2024

    Reply of Application/ Steps by parties

    Nyayadhikari

  35. 01-Aug-2024

    Reply of Application/ Steps by parties

    Nyayadhikari

  36. 06-Jul-2024

    Reply of Application/ Steps by parties

    Nyayadhikari

  37. 20-May-2024

    Awaiting Services of notices/ summons

    Nyayadhikari

  38. 16-May-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  39. 06-May-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 13/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of Case 13/2024 - Birbal v. Nandlal Advocate Outcome: The court granted a temporary injunction in favor of petitioner Birbal against respondents Nandlal Advocate (Shri Ashok Kumar Jangir) and Rajkumar. The respondents are restrained from interfering with the disputed agricultural land pending final judgment in the main case. The court found that petitioner established a prima facie case regarding property rights and that the balance of convenience favors protecting the property status quo. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case