Smadar Singh vs Jagdish Singh Advocate - Sh. Mahendra Choudhary — 20/2025
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section O39. Disposed: Contested--Dismissed after Full Trial/Hearing on 06th May 2026.
Civil Misc. Connected (41) - CIVIL MISC (C)
CNR: RJMR010003752025
Filing Number
89/2025
Filing Date
16-05-2025
Registration No
20/2025
Registration Date
16-05-2025
Court
DJ Merta District HQ
Judge
1-District and Sessions Judge, Merta
Decision Date
06th May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Dismissed after Full Trial/Hearing
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Smadar Singh
Adv. Sh. Ramvilas
Respondent(s)
Jagdish Singh Advocate - Sh. Mahendra Choudhary
Hearing History
Judge: 1-District and Sessions Judge, Merta
Disposed
Orders
Orders
Final arguments
Final arguments
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 06-05-2026 | Disposed |
| 05-05-2026 | Orders |
| 02-05-2026 | Orders |
| 13-03-2026 | Final arguments |
| 12-02-2026 | Final arguments |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: 20/2025 Case: Smadar Singh v. Jagdish Singh Shekawat & Others Court: District Court, Merta, Rajasthan Date: 06-05-2026 The court rejected the petitioner's application under Order 39 Rules 1-2 read with Section 151 CPC seeking to restrain respondents from transferring certain properties and to preserve the status quo. The petitioner claimed he had given ₹27,00,000 to respondent-1 for investment purposes in 2022 at 2% monthly interest, with assurances of repayment, supported by written acknowledgments. The court found the petitioner failed to establish: (1) a prima facie case, as the written documents lacked proper evidentiary foundation and no conditional charge on properties was documented; (2) balance of convenience favoring the petitioner; and (3) irreparable injury. Consequently, the petition was dismissed as the petitioner could not prove the three essential grounds required for interim relief. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: 20/2025 Case: Smadar Singh v. Jagdish Singh Shekawat & Others Court: District Court, Merta, Rajasthan Date: 06-05-2026 The court rejected the petitioner's application under Order 39 Rules 1-2 read with Section 151 CPC seeking to restrain respondents from transferring certain properties and to preserve the status quo. The petitioner claimed he had given ₹27,00,000 to respondent-1 for investment purposes in 2022 at 2% monthly interest, with assurances of repayment, supported by written acknowledgments. The court found the petitioner failed to establish: (1) a prima facie case, as the written documents lacked proper evidentiary foundation and no conditional charge on properties was documented; (2) balance of convenience favoring the petitioner; and (3) irreparable injury. Consequently, the petition was dismissed as the petitioner could not prove the three essential grounds required for interim relief. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts