Mangat ram vs Rampratap @ pratap etc Advocate - MOOLA RAM — 257/2014
Disposed: Contested--Dismissed after Full Trial/Hearing on 22nd May 2026.
Co - Civil Suit
CNR: RJSG090001682012
Filing Number
791/2014
Filing Date
30-08-2012
Registration No
257/2014
Registration Date
30-08-2012
Court
ADJ ANOOPGARH TALUKA
Judge
1-ADJ
Decision Date
22nd May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Dismissed after Full Trial/Hearing
Petitioner(s)
Mangat ram
Adv. INDRAJ KASWAN
Respondent(s)
Rampratap @ pratap etc Advocate - MOOLA RAM
Hearing History
Judge: 1-ADJ
Final arguments
Restored
Disposed
Final arguments
Final arguments
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 22-05-2026 | Final arguments |
| 22-05-2026 | Restored |
| 22-05-2026 | Disposed |
| 12-05-2026 | Final arguments |
| 04-05-2026 | Final arguments |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: Mangat Ram v. Rampratap (CRS 257/2014) Court Decision: The court dismissed the plaintiff Mangat Ram's suit for specific performance of a deed of sale dated 03.05.2003 and permanent injunction against defendants Rampratap and others. Key Reasoning: The court found that the plaintiff failed to prove the execution of the original deed of sale dated 03.05.2003 with contradictory witness testimony and insufficient documentary evidence regarding payment and possession transfer. Additionally, the suit was filed beyond the 3-year limitation period prescribed under the Limitation Act, 1954 for such claims. The defendants' subsequent deed dated 24.08.2012 benefited only one co-owner (Balvant), and since the foundational transaction remained unproven and time-barred, the plaintiff could not claim specific performance or injunctive relief. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Mangat Ram v. Rampratap (CRS 257/2014) Court Decision: The court dismissed the plaintiff Mangat Ram's suit for specific performance of a deed of sale dated 03.05.2003 and permanent injunction against defendants Rampratap and others. Key Reasoning: The court found that the plaintiff failed to prove the execution of the original deed of sale dated 03.05.2003 with contradictory witness testimony and insufficient documentary evidence regarding payment and possession transfer. Additionally, the suit was filed beyond the 3-year limitation period prescribed under the Limitation Act, 1954 for such claims. The defendants' subsequent deed dated 24.08.2012 benefited only one co-owner (Balvant), and since the foundational transaction remained unproven and time-barred, the plaintiff could not claim specific performance or injunctive relief. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Explore other courts