Mool chand Parashar vs Laxman and others — 25/2020
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section order 43. Disposed: Contested--DECIDED on 27th April 2026.
Misc. Civil Appeal
CNR: UPMT010075522020
Filing Number
1248/2020
Filing Date
14-10-2020
Registration No
25/2020
Registration Date
06-11-2020
Court
District and Session Judge, Mathura
Judge
7-Addl. District Judge Court No. 6
Decision Date
27th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DECIDED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Mool chand Parashar
Adv. Tulsi Das Pathak
Respondent(s)
Laxman and others
Hearing History
Judge: 7-Addl. District Judge Court No. 6
Restored
Hearing
Disposed
Disposed
Hearing
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 27-04-2026 | Restored |
| 27-04-2026 | Hearing |
| 27-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 24-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 10-04-2026 | Hearing |
Interim Orders
Summary The Additional District Judge of Mathura dismissed a civil appeal challenging an order that denied temporary injunction in a joint Hindu family property dispute. The court upheld the lower court's finding that the appellants failed to establish a prima facie case, as they could not produce documentary evidence (such as registered deeds) proving legal division of the disputed agricultural land dated 08.10.2015, with revenue records showing the property in the name of the elderly widow (respondent no. 4). Since the three conditions for granting temporary injunction—prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury—were not satisfied, the appeal was dismissed and the original order was affirmed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The Additional District Judge of Mathura dismissed a civil appeal challenging an order that denied temporary injunction in a joint Hindu family property dispute. The court upheld the lower court's finding that the appellants failed to establish a prima facie case, as they could not produce documentary evidence (such as registered deeds) proving legal division of the disputed agricultural land dated 08.10.2015, with revenue records showing the property in the name of the elderly widow (respondent no. 4). Since the three conditions for granting temporary injunction—prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury—were not satisfied, the appeal was dismissed and the original order was affirmed. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts