Babu Singh Krishna Devi Summti Shirdidhan Farrukhabad vs Jan Sadharad — 123/2023

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section na. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 06th May 2026.

Case disposed

Misc. Civil Cases

CNR: UPKJ010061702023

Filing Number

307/2023

Filing Date

06-Nov-2023

Registration No

123/2023

Registration Date

07-Nov-2023

Court

District and Session Judge

Judge

1-District & Session Judge

Decision Date

06-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

Last updated 27-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section na

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Babu Singh Krishna Devi Summti Shirdidhan Farrukhabad

    Adv. Deepesh Kumar Mishra

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Jan Sadharad

  2. 2.dr. Aneeta Ranjan

  3. 3.Tuhina Bharti

  4. 4.Samradhi Singh

  5. 5.Kaushlendra Singh

  6. 6.Atul Kumar

  7. 7.Javed Ali

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 06-May-2026

    Application DisposalView PDF

    Case Summary: 123/2023 Court Decision: The District Judge of Kannauj rejected the petition filed by Babu Singh Krishna Devi Committee seeking permission to mortgage or sell property donated to the organization. The court found the petition contradictory and lacking sufficient legal justification—it simultaneously sought authorization for both mortgaging property to banks and selling it, without clear legal grounds supporting either action. Key Reasoning: The court emphasized that while no objections were raised by respondents, mere non-opposition cannot justify disposing of a charitable society's property. Since the property was acquired through a donation deed, the petitioner bore the burden of establishing clear, coherent, and legal justification for its sale or mortgage. The court held it was its duty to protect society property interests and ensure lawful proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 06-May-2026

    Disposed

    District & Session Judge

  4. 17-Apr-2026

    Hearing

    District & Session Judge

  5. 12-Mar-2026

    Hearing

    District & Session Judge

  6. 03-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    District & Session Judge

  7. 07-Jan-2026

    Hearing

    District & Session Judge

  8. 09-Dec-2025

    Hearing

    District & Session Judge

  9. 06-Nov-2025

    Hearing

    District & Session Judge

  10. 13-Oct-2025

    Hearing

    District & Session Judge

  11. 23-Sep-2025

    Hearing

    District & Session Judge

  12. 13-Sep-2025

    Hearing

    District & Session Judge

  13. 29-Aug-2025

    Hearing

    District & Session Judge

  14. 28-Jul-2025

    Hearing

    District & Session Judge

  15. 01-Jul-2025

    Hearing

    District & Session Judge

  16. 13-May-2025

    Hearing

    District & Session Judge

  17. 12-May-2025

    Hearing

    District & Session Judge

  18. 28-Apr-2025

    Hearing

    District & Session Judge

  19. 24-Mar-2025

    Hearing

    District & Session Judge

  20. 01-Mar-2025

    Hearing

    District & Session Judge

  21. 23-Jan-2025

    Hearing

    District & Session Judge

  22. 11-Dec-2024

    Hearing

    District & Session Judge

  23. 07-Nov-2024

    Hearing

    District & Session Judge

  24. 23-Sep-2024

    Hearing

    District & Session Judge

  25. 14-Aug-2024

    Hearing

    District & Session Judge

  26. 04-Jul-2024

    Hearing

    District & Session Judge

  27. 01-May-2024

    Hearing

    District & Session Judge

  28. 21-Mar-2024

    Hearing

    District & Session Judge

  29. 20-Feb-2024

    Hearing

    District & Session Judge

  30. 16-Jan-2024

    Hearing

    District & Session Judge

  31. 08-Dec-2023

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  32. 06-Nov-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. 123/2023

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 123/2023 Court Decision: The District Judge of Kannauj rejected the petition filed by Babu Singh Krishna Devi Committee seeking permission to mortgage or sell property donated to the organization. The court found the petition contradictory and lacking sufficient legal justification—it simultaneously sought authorization for both mortgaging property to banks and selling it, without clear legal grounds supporting either action. Key Reasoning: The court emphasized that while no objections were raised by respondents, mere non-opposition cannot justify disposing of a charitable society's property. Since the property was acquired through a donation deed, the petitioner bore the burden of establishing clear, coherent, and legal justification for its sale or mortgage. The court held it was its duty to protect society property interests and ensure lawful proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case