Chandraprakash and others vs Mahraj Khan and others — 63/2025
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 115. Disposed: Contested--DECIDED on 09th March 2026.
Civil Revision
CNR: UPGZ010116212025
Filing Number
664/2025
Filing Date
11-Aug-2025
Registration No
63/2025
Registration Date
11-Aug-2025
Court
District and Session Judge
Judge
1-District & Session Judge
Decision Date
09-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DECIDED
Last updated 17-Apr-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Chandraprakash and others
Adv. Chinmay Upadhyay
Respondent(s)
-
1.Mahraj Khan and others
-
2.Mohm. Siraj
-
3.Salar Khan
-
4.Shama Parveen
-
5.Sarfaraj Khan
-
6.Aamir Khan
-
7.Kadar Khan
-
8.Sava
-
9.Sachin
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
09-Mar-2026
Copy of JudgmentView PDF
Summary The court upheld the lower court's order dismissing the petitioner's application seeking a fresh commissioner's inspection regarding disputed agricultural land (Plot No. 139). The court found that the original commissioner's report dated 09.01.2024 was already examined and corroborated by evidence, and the petitioner failed to provide specific grounds for changes in the site conditions, making a second inspection unnecessary. The appeal was rejected and the lower court's decision of 15.05.2025 was affirmed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
09-Mar-2026
Disposed
District & Session Judge
-
23-Feb-2026
Hearing
District & Session Judge
-
09-Feb-2026
Hearing
District & Session Judge
-
03-Feb-2026
Hearing
District & Session Judge
-
02-Feb-2026
Hearing
District & Session Judge
-
19-Jan-2026
Hearing
District & Session Judge
-
13-Jan-2026
Hearing
District & Session Judge
-
18-Dec-2025
Hearing
District & Session Judge
-
06-Dec-2025
Hearing
District & Session Judge
-
24-Nov-2025
Hearing
District & Session Judge
-
06-Oct-2025
Hearing
District & Session Judge
-
02-Sep-2025
Hearing
District & Session Judge
-
11-Aug-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
11-Aug-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 63/2025
Summary The court upheld the lower court's order dismissing the petitioner's application seeking a fresh commissioner's inspection regarding disputed agricultural land (Plot No. 139). The court found that the original commissioner's report dated 09.01.2024 was already examined and corroborated by evidence, and the petitioner failed to provide specific grounds for changes in the site conditions, making a second inspection unnecessary. The appeal was rejected and the lower court's decision of 15.05.2025 was affirmed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts