RABIABI (DEAD) vs SHAHABI (D) BY LRS . — C.A. No. 4467/2010

Case under Family Laws : Succession, Inheritance, Devolution of Property, Gift, Partition Amongst Family Members Section XII-B. Status: DISPOSED.

CNR: SCIN010083672010

DISPOSED

Filing Date

15-Mar-2010

Registration No

C.A. No. 4467/2010

Diary Number

8367/2010

Order Date

08-Feb-2024

Document Type

ROP - of Main Case

Disposal Type

Dismissed

Data as of 03-Jul-2026

Advertisement

Acts & Sections

Family Laws : Succession, Inheritance, devolution of property, gift, partition amongst family members Section XII-B

Petitioner(s)

RABIABI (DEAD)

Adv. KIRTI RENU MISHRA[P-1]

Respondent(s)

SHAHABI (D) BY LRS .

Adv. ANKOLEKAR GURUDATTA[R-2.2] NISHANT RAMAKANTRAO KATNESHWARKAR[R-1.1] V. N. RAGHUPATHY[R-4.4] MRS. VIPIN GUPTA[R-4.6] MRS. VIPIN GUPTA[R-4.5] MRS. VIPIN GUPTA[R-4.3] MRS. VIPIN GUPTA[R-4.2] MRS. VIPIN GUPTA[R-4.1] SUDHANSHU S. CHOUDHARI (Dead / Retired / Elevated) [R-3.2] NISHANT RAMAKANTRAO KATNESHWARKAR[R-3.1] P. R. RAMASESH[R-2.3] P. R. RAMASESH[R-2.1.7] P. R. RAMASESH[R-2.1.6] P. R. RAMASESH[R-2.1.5] P. R. RAMASESH[R-2.1.4] P. R. RAMASESH[R-2.1.3] P. R. RAMASESH[R-2.1.2] P. R. RAMASESH[R-2.1.1]

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.T. RAVIKUMAR and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL

08-Feb-2024

Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week

07-Feb-2024

Next Week / Week Commencing / C.O.Week

01-Feb-2024

Fixed Date by Court

24-Jan-2024

After Week/Month/Vacation

24-Jan-2024

After Week/Month/Vacation

Orders

11-Jul-2016 ROP
11-Jul-2016 ROP
15-Dec-2015 ROP
15-Dec-2015 ROP
28-Sep-2015 ROP
28-Sep-2015 ROP
30-Jul-2015 ROP
30-Jul-2015 ROP
View Full Judgment
casestatus.in Summary

Summary of Civil Appeal No. 4467/2010 The Supreme Court dismissed both Civil Appeals (CA 4467/2010 and CA 4466/2010) on 8 February 2024. In CA 4467/2010, the appellant challenged directions 3 and 4 of the lower court's order, but the Court found no reason to interfere. In CA 4466/2010, the appellant (Power of Attorney holder) challenged the trial court's findings that he was not the valid POA holder and that property purchasers were not bona fide; the Court upheld these findings, noting the purchasers did not appeal. All pending applications were disposed of. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

Supreme Court of India All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case