RAFAT SAYEEDA vs RAJESH KUMAR GOEL — SA/47/2026

Case under Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Act No. 5 of 1908) Section 100. Next hearing: 10th July 2026.

CNR: UKHC010074512026

Next Hearing

10th July 2026

Filing Number

SA/3905/2026

Filing Date

05-05-2026

Registration No

SA/47/2026

Registration Date

05-05-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Siddhartha Sah

Coram

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Siddhartha Sah

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

APPEAL ( 3 )

Sub-Category

SECOND APPEAL ( 4 )

Judicial Branch

ALL SECTIONS (CIVIL AND CRIMINAL)

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Act No. 5 of 1908) Section 100

Petitioner(s)

RAFAT SAYEEDA

Adv. VINAY BHATT,MOHD SHAFY,MOHD SHAFY, ,MOHD SHAFY

TAYYAB SIDDIQUE

MOHD SALMAN SIDDIQUE

Respondent(s)

RAJESH KUMAR GOEL

FAIZAN SIDDIQUI(Legal Heir)2.

SMT ZAREEBA2.

NOORAIN

Hearing History

Judge: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Siddhartha Sah

07-05-2026

FRESH CASES FOR ADMISSION -3

10-07-2026

FRESH CASES FOR ADMISSION -3

10-07-2026

FRESH CASES FOR ADMISSION -3

Orders

07-05-2026
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Siddhartha Sah

Case Summary: SA/47/2026 Outcome: Second appeal admitted for hearing on substantial questions of law. The High Court admitted the defendants' second appeal challenging the First Appellate Court's judgment (dated 02.04.2026) that had decreed the plaintiff's suit for permanent injunction over a 14X20 feet vacant plot. The trial court had dismissed the suit when it proceeded ex parte after the defendant stopped participating. The court admitted the appeal on two substantial questions: (i) whether the plaintiff adduced sufficient evidence, and (ii) whether the trial court properly ignored unrebutted evidence. Status quo on the property is maintained pending next hearing on 10.07.2026. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: SA/47/2026 Outcome: Second appeal admitted for hearing on substantial questions of law. The High Court admitted the defendants' second appeal challenging the First Appellate Court's judgment (dated 02.04.2026) that had decreed the plaintiff's suit for permanent injunction over a 14X20 feet vacant plot. The trial court had dismissed the suit when it proceeded ex parte after the defendant stopped participating. The court admitted the appeal on two substantial questions: (i) whether the plaintiff adduced sufficient evidence, and (ii) whether the trial court properly ignored unrebutted evidence. Status quo on the property is maintained pending next hearing on 10.07.2026. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Explore other courts

Search Another Case