Ram Narayan vs Rajesh Kumar Agrawal Advocate - Anurag Dwivedi — 19/2024
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 115. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED on 08th May 2026.
Civil Revision
CNR: UPCH010029092024
Filing Number
108/2024
Filing Date
08-Nov-2024
Registration No
19/2024
Registration Date
08-Nov-2024
Court
District and Session Judge
Judge
1-District and Sessions Judge
Decision Date
08-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED
Last updated 17-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Ram Narayan
Adv. Krishna Kumar
-
2.Chhotelal
Adv. Krishna Kumar
Respondent(s)
-
1.Rajesh Kumar Agrawal Advocate - Anurag Dwivedi
-
2.Aruna Agrawal
-
3.Arpit Agrawal
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
08-May-2026
JudgmentView PDF
Summary The District Judge of Chitrakoot dismissed an application under Section 47 CPC filed by Ramnarayan and others, finding that the applicants (purchasers from alleged tenants) are neither necessary nor proper parties to an eviction suit since they purchased the property through a sale deed dated 05.03.2020 after the original defendants had asserted tenancy rights, not ownership. The court upheld the earlier judgment that legal representatives of a party remain bound by their predecessor's admissions, and mere execution of a sale deed does not entitle purchasers to be impleaded when the underlying dispute concerns tenancy relationships established in original pleadings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
08-May-2026
Disposed
District and Sessions Judge
-
30-Apr-2026
Arguments
District and Sessions Judge
-
27-Apr-2026
Arguments
District and Sessions Judge
-
10-Apr-2026
Arguments
District and Sessions Judge
-
19-Mar-2026
Arguments
District and Sessions Judge
-
11-Mar-2026
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge
-
13-Feb-2026
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge
-
31-Jan-2026
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge
-
03-Jan-2026
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge
-
05-Dec-2025
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge
-
24-Oct-2025
Hearing
A.D.J. F.T.C - New
-
22-Sep-2025
Hearing
A.D.J. F.T.C - New
-
21-Aug-2025
Hearing
A.D.J. F.T.C - New
-
16-Jul-2025
Hearing
A.D.J. F.T.C - New
-
28-May-2025
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge
-
09-May-2025
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge
-
18-Apr-2025
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge
-
03-Apr-2025
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge
-
18-Mar-2025
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge
-
01-Mar-2025
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge
-
04-Feb-2025
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge
-
15-Jan-2025
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge
-
20-Dec-2024
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge
-
02-Dec-2024
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge
-
23-Nov-2024
Hearing
District and Sessions Judge
-
08-Nov-2024
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
08-Nov-2024
Case filed
Registration No. 19/2024
Summary The District Judge of Chitrakoot dismissed an application under Section 47 CPC filed by Ramnarayan and others, finding that the applicants (purchasers from alleged tenants) are neither necessary nor proper parties to an eviction suit since they purchased the property through a sale deed dated 05.03.2020 after the original defendants had asserted tenancy rights, not ownership. The court upheld the earlier judgment that legal representatives of a party remain bound by their predecessor's admissions, and mere execution of a sale deed does not entitle purchasers to be impleaded when the underlying dispute concerns tenancy relationships established in original pleadings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts