NIMESHKUMAR DANAJI SANKHALA BRANCH MANAGER SHRI BARODA GUJRAT GARAMIN BANK DEESA vs MAGANBHAI NATHUBHAI RABARI @ KHATANA — 13/2025

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 26,. Disposed: Contested--JUDGEMENT on 08th April 2026.

RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT

CNR: GJBK040003842025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

13/2025

Filing Date

16-01-2025

Registration No

13/2025

Registration Date

16-01-2025

Court

TALUKA COURT, DEESA

Judge

16-ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE & A.C.J.M.

Decision Date

08th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGEMENT

Acts & Sections

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 Section 26,

Petitioner(s)

NIMESHKUMAR DANAJI SANKHALA BRANCH MANAGER SHRI BARODA GUJRAT GARAMIN BANK DEESA

Adv. H D TRIVEDI

Respondent(s)

MAGANBHAI NATHUBHAI RABARI @ KHATANA

BABUBHAI NATHUBHAI RABARI @ KHATANA

LEBABHAI NATHUBHAI RABARI @ KHATANA

MAGANBHAI MADHABHAI RABARI

RAMESHBHAI SEDHABHAI RABARI @ KHATANA

Hearing History

Judge: 16-ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE & A.C.J.M.

08-04-2026

Disposed

03-04-2026

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

27-03-2026

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

10-03-2026

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

02-03-2026

PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE

Final Orders / Judgements

08-04-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Summary The Additional Senior Civil Judge at Deesa, Gujarat, ordered the defendants to repay Rs. 8,69,786.70 to Gujarat Gramin Bank with 6% annual interest from the date of suit filing. The court found that the defendants had obtained a Kisan Credit Card loan of Rs. 7,98,000 in 2021, mortgaged their agricultural land as security, and failed to repay the amount as stipulated in the loan agreement. The defendants were also ordered to bear all court costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Additional Senior Civil Judge at Deesa, Gujarat, ordered the defendants to repay Rs. 8,69,786.70 to Gujarat Gramin Bank with 6% annual interest from the date of suit filing. The court found that the defendants had obtained a Kisan Credit Card loan of Rs. 7,98,000 in 2021, mortgaged their agricultural land as security, and failed to repay the amount as stipulated in the loan agreement. The defendants were also ordered to bear all court costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, DEESA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case