SANJAYBHAI MANUBHAI BAVADIYA vs CHHIMKABHAI MAGANBHAI PATEL Advocate - MR NM KAPADIA( — FA/895/2026

Case under Civil Procedure Code, 1908 Section 96. Status: 182-For Final Hearing. Next hearing: : -.

182-For Final Hearing Next hearing —

CNR: GJHC240171042026

Filing Number

FA/7229/2026

Filing Date

02-Mar-2026

Registration No

FA/895/2026

Registration Date

06-Mar-2026

Judge

Honourable Mr. Justice J. C. Doshi

Coram

Honourable Mr. Justice J. C. Doshi

Bench Type

SINGLE

Category

276-SJ - FIRST APPEAL - CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 ( 276 )

Sub-Category

1229-SJ - FIRST APPEAL - CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 - CHALLENGING THE AWARD ( 1229 )

Judicial Branch

JUDICIAL

Last updated 12-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 Section 96

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SANJAYBHAI MANUBHAI BAVADIYA

    Adv. VIRAL K SHAH(

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.CHHIMKABHAI MAGANBHAI PATEL Advocate - MR NM KAPADIA(

  2. 2.RANJITBHAI MAGANBHAI PATEL SINCE DECEASED THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS AND REPRESENTATIVES

    Adv. MR NM KAPADIA(

  3. 3.2.

  4. 4.BHARTIBEN WD/O. RANJITBHAI MAGANBHAI PATEL

    Adv. MR NM KAPADIA(

  5. 5.2.

  6. 6.PUKARKUMAR RANJITBHAI PATEL

    Adv. MR NM KAPADIA(

  7. 7.2.

  8. 8.PURVIBEN D/O. RANJITBHAI MAGANBHAI PATEL W/O. VIKASHBHAI

    Adv. MR NM KAPADIA(

  9. 9.SHANTILAL MAGANLAL PATEL SINCE DECEASED THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS AND REPRESENTATIVES

    Adv. MR NM KAPADIA(

  10. 10.3.

  11. 11.NIRMALABEN WD/O SHANTUBHAI @ SHANTILAL MAGANLAL PATEL

    Adv. MR NM KAPADIA(

  12. 12.3.

  13. 13.YAKINBHAI SHANTUBHAI @ SHANTILAL MAGANLAL PATEL

    Adv. MR NM KAPADIA(

  14. 14.3.

  15. 15.NAINTIKABEN D/O. SHANTUBHAI @ SHANTILAL MAGANLAL PATEL W/O. BRIJESHBHAI PATEL

    Adv. MR NM KAPADIA(

  16. 16.3.

  17. 17.ALPIKABEN D/O. SHANTUBHAI @ SHANTILAL MAGANLAL PATEL W/O. PRATIKBHAI PATEL

    Adv. MR NM KAPADIA(

  18. 18.VINODCHANDRA DATTATREY BHATT

    Adv. MR DHRUV D DESAI(

  19. 19.JAYANTILAL DATTATREY BHATT

    Adv. MR DHRUV D DESAI(

  20. 20.BHARATKUMAR DATTATREY BHATT

    Adv. MR DHRUV D DESAI(

  21. 21.SAVITRIBEN NATVARLAL BHATT (DELETED)

  22. 22.MAHESHKUMAR NATVARLAL BHATT

    Adv. MR DHRUV D DESAI(

  23. 23.PANKAJKUMAR NATVALAL BHATT SINCE DECEASED THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS AND REPRESENTATIVES

    Adv. DECEASED LITIGANT(

  24. 24.9.

  25. 25.NADABEN PANKAJBHAI BHATT

    Adv. MR DHRUV D DESAI(

  26. 26.9.

  27. 27.YAGNIK PANKAJBHAI BHATT

    Adv. RULE NOT RECD BACK(

  28. 28.VARSHABEN @ VINABEN D/O. NATVARLAL BHATT

    Adv. MR DHRUV D DESAI(

  29. 29.GITABEN D/O. NATVARLAL BHATT W/O. KASHYAPBHAI VAIDHYA

    Adv. MR DHRUV D DESAI(

  30. 30.VINUBHAI HIRJIBHAI GINOYA

    Adv. MR. YASHRAJSINH V. VAGHELA(

Case History

  1. —

    Next hearingPending

  2. 10-Apr-2026

    Honourable Mr. Justice Ashutosh Shastri,honourable Mr. Justice J. C. DoshiView PDF

    Summary: The High Court of Gujarat admitted the First Appeal challenging the lower court's decree that cancelled a power of attorney and agreement to sell. The Court found merit in the appeal because the disputed property changed hands during litigation and third-party owners were not joined as defendants, thereby affecting their proprietary rights. A stay order was granted maintaining status quo on the property's title and possession, keeping the impugned judgment in abeyance pending further proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 10-Apr-2026

    Honourable Mr. Justice Ashutosh Shastri,honourable Mr. Justice J. C. Doshi

  4. 10-Apr-2026

    529-For Admission

    Honourable Mr. Justice J. C. Doshi

  5. 12-Mar-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  6. 02-Mar-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. FA/895/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The High Court of Gujarat admitted the First Appeal challenging the lower court's decree that cancelled a power of attorney and agreement to sell. The Court found merit in the appeal because the disputed property changed hands during litigation and third-party owners were not joined as defendants, thereby affecting their proprietary rights. A stay order was granted maintaining status quo on the property's title and possession, keeping the impugned judgment in abeyance pending further proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case