GUJRAT GRAMIN BANK DEESA BRANCH MANAGER SHRI NIMESHKUMAR DANAJI SANKHALA vs RABARI HAJAJI SAMELAJI — 133/2025

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

RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT

CNR: GJBK040053532025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

133/2025

Filing Date

16-09-2025

Registration No

133/2025

Registration Date

16-09-2025

Court

TALUKA COURT, DEESA

Judge

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

Decision Date

08th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--EX-PARTE JUDGEMENT

Acts & Sections

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 Section 26,

Petitioner(s)

GUJRAT GRAMIN BANK DEESA BRANCH MANAGER SHRI NIMESHKUMAR DANAJI SANKHALA

Adv. H D TRIVEDI

Respondent(s)

RABARI HAJAJI SAMELAJI

VASNABHAI HAJABHAI RABARI

RABARI KASNABHAI HAJAJI

RABARI KHENGARBHAI HAJAJI

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

Judgment Summary The Additional Senior Civil Judge at Deesa ruled in favor of Gujarat Gramin Bank, ordering defendants to pay Rs. 9,06,469.07 as outstanding agricultural loan principal and interest at 6% per annum from the suit's institution date. The court accepted the bank's documentary evidence (loan agreements, mortgage deed, and ledger statements) despite defendants' non-appearance, and drew adverse inferences against them, thereby ordering they also bear all litigation costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Judgment Summary The Additional Senior Civil Judge at Deesa ruled in favor of Gujarat Gramin Bank, ordering defendants to pay Rs. 9,06,469.07 as outstanding agricultural loan principal and interest at 6% per annum from the suit's institution date. The court accepted the bank's documentary evidence (loan agreements, mortgage deed, and ledger statements) despite defendants' non-appearance, and drew adverse inferences against them, thereby ordering they also bear all litigation 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