Moolchand vs Gulam rabbani Advocate - SHRI RAJNESH MAHALA — 13/2023

Case under --- Section 39. Disposed: Contested--Allowed / Granted after Full Trial / Hearing on 09th April 2026.

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

CNR: RJSK110000302023

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

29/2023

Filing Date

13-07-2023

Registration No

13/2023

Registration Date

13-07-2023

Court

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE FATEHPUR TALUKA HQ

Judge

1-ACJM

Decision Date

09th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Allowed / Granted after Full Trial / Hearing

Acts & Sections

--- Section 39

Petitioner(s)

Moolchand

Adv. SHRI MUKESH BHATARA

Respondent(s)

Gulam rabbani Advocate - SHRI RAJNESH MAHALA

Hearing History

Judge: 1-ACJM

09-04-2026

Disposed

08-04-2026

Arguments on Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings

10-03-2026

Reply of Application/ Steps by parties

06-03-2026

Arguments on Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings

02-02-2026

Arguments on Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings

Final Orders / Judgements

09-04-2026
Order

The court granted the plaintiff Moolchand's interim injunction petition against defendant Gulam Rabbani, restraining him from transferring or alienating disputed agricultural land covered by a sale deed dated 08.08.2022. The court found a prima facie case in the plaintiff's favor, as the defendant admitted signing the sale deed, and determined that granting the injunction would prevent greater hardship to the plaintiff and avoid multiplicitous litigation. The case will proceed to trial where both parties' evidence will be examined to finally determine the validity of the transaction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The court granted the plaintiff Moolchand's interim injunction petition against defendant Gulam Rabbani, restraining him from transferring or alienating disputed agricultural land covered by a sale deed dated 08.08.2022. The court found a prima facie case in the plaintiff's favor, as the defendant admitted signing the sale deed, and determined that granting the injunction would prevent greater hardship to the plaintiff and avoid multiplicitous litigation. The case will proceed to trial where both parties' evidence will be examined to finally determine the validity of the transaction. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE FATEHPUR TALUKA HQ All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case