M/S. SAMPATI SECURITIES LIMITED AUTHORIZED PERSON OF JIGARKUMAR NARMADA SHANKAR RAVAL vs NIHAL NITYANAND DUBEY — 12351/2025

Case under Payment and Settlement Act, 2007 Section 25. Disposed: Uncontested--LOK ADALAT on 14th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJBK020209292025

Filing Number

12351/2025

Filing Date

25-Aug-2025

Registration No

12351/2025

Registration Date

25-Aug-2025

Court

CIVIL COURT PALANPUR

Judge

2-6th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--LOK ADALAT

Last updated 23-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Payment and Settlement Act, 2007 Section 25

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.M/S. SAMPATI SECURITIES LIMITED AUTHORIZED PERSON OF JIGARKUMAR NARMADA SHANKAR RAVAL

    Adv. P D PATEL

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.NIHAL NITYANAND DUBEY

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    OrderView PDF

    Summary The court dismissed the petition as the applicant failed to establish sufficient grounds to continue proceedings. The court found that allegations against the accused lacked merit and directed that the case be referred back to the public prosecutor, concluding that no grounds exist to prosecute the accused based on video evidence presented. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    6th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  4. 09-Mar-2026

    Process To Accused

    6th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  5. 31-Jan-2026

    Process To Accused

    6th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  6. 17-Dec-2025

    Process To Accused

    7th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  7. 15-Nov-2025

    Process To Accused

    7th Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge & A.C.J.M.

  8. 29-Sep-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  9. 25-Aug-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 12351/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court dismissed the petition as the applicant failed to establish sufficient grounds to continue proceedings. The court found that allegations against the accused lacked merit and directed that the case be referred back to the public prosecutor, concluding that no grounds exist to prosecute the accused based on video evidence presented. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case