MANAGER SHREE, BANK OF BARODA vs RAMILABA PRAVINSINH SOLANKI — 30/2024
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 34,9. Disposed: Uncontested--EX-PARTE JUDGEMENT on 18th March 2026.
RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT
CNR: GJAH150002672024
Filing Number
30/2024
Filing Date
18-03-2024
Registration No
30/2024
Registration Date
18-03-2024
Court
Taluka Court, Detroj
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
18th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--EX-PARTE JUDGEMENT
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
MANAGER SHREE, BANK OF BARODA
Adv. R A SHAH
Respondent(s)
RAMILABA PRAVINSINH SOLANKI
RANADHIRSINH HEMANTSINH SOLANKI
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 18-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 11-03-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 04-02-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE |
| 07-01-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE |
| 10-12-2025 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary In this regular civil case, the Principal Senior Civil Judge of Betrojaa ruled partially in favor of Bank of Baroda against defendants Ramilaba and Randhirsinh regarding a loan dispute. The court ordered defendant No. 1 to pay the bank ₹2,28,944.37 (principal amount of ₹5,00,000 with accrued interest) at 9% per annum from the date of the judgment, and permitted the bank to recover this amount from defendant No. 1's property; defendant No. 2 (guarantor) was held jointly liable. The court also directed the defendants to bear the case costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary In this regular civil case, the Principal Senior Civil Judge of Betrojaa ruled partially in favor of Bank of Baroda against defendants Ramilaba and Randhirsinh regarding a loan dispute. The court ordered defendant No. 1 to pay the bank ₹2,28,944.37 (principal amount of ₹5,00,000 with accrued interest) at 9% per annum from the date of the judgment, and permitted the bank to recover this amount from defendant No. 1's property; defendant No. 2 (guarantor) was held jointly liable. The court also directed the defendants to bear the case costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts