SHRI RAM FINANCE LIMITED NA LEGAL HED KAMLESH JENTIBHAI CHAVDA vs JASUBHAI BHIKHABHAI SINGAD — 2482/2025

Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138. Disposed: Uncontested--LOK ADALAT on 14th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJBN050035642025

Filing Number

2482/2025

Filing Date

28-Nov-2025

Registration No

2482/2025

Registration Date

28-Nov-2025

Court

TALUKA COURT, MAHUVA

Judge

5-Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--LOK ADALAT

Last updated 31-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SHRI RAM FINANCE LIMITED NA LEGAL HED KAMLESH JENTIBHAI CHAVDA

    Adv. S K TANK

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.JASUBHAI BHIKHABHAI SINGAD

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    Order

    Summary of Case 2482/2025 The court dismissed Shri Ram Finance Limited's case against Jasubhai Bhikhabhai Singad, finding that the defendant had already paid the cheque amount claimed. The court ruled that since the debt obligation was satisfied, there was no basis to continue the proceedings and ordered the case closed with costs imposed on the petitioner. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  4. 13-Mar-2026

    Process To Accused

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  5. 04-Feb-2026

    Process To Accused

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  6. 10-Jan-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 28-Nov-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 2482/2025

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of Case 2482/2025 The court dismissed Shri Ram Finance Limited's case against Jasubhai Bhikhabhai Singad, finding that the defendant had already paid the cheque amount claimed. The court ruled that since the debt obligation was satisfied, there was no basis to continue the proceedings and ordered the case closed with costs imposed on the petitioner. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case