PGVCL SANOSARA SUB DIVISION SIHOR vs JAYUBHAI BHIKHABHAI GOHIL — 14/2026

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 51,34. Disposed: Uncontested--DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT on 10th April 2026.

EXE R - EXECUTION PETITION - REGULAR

CNR: GJBN080000472026

Case disposed

Filing Number

14/2026

Filing Date

13-01-2026

Registration No

14/2026

Registration Date

13-01-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, SIHOR

Judge

3-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM

Decision Date

10th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT

Acts & Sections

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 Section 51,34

Petitioner(s)

PGVCL SANOSARA SUB DIVISION SIHOR

Adv. P B HARMANI

Respondent(s)

JAYUBHAI BHIKHABHAI GOHIL

Hearing History

Judge: 3-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM

10-04-2026

Disposed

13-03-2026

WARRANT OF ATTACHMENT

19-02-2026

SHOW-CAUSE NOTICE TO JUDGEMENT DEBTOR

05-02-2026

SHOW-CAUSE NOTICE TO JUDGEMENT DEBTOR

13-01-2026

SHOW-CAUSE NOTICE TO JUDGEMENT DEBTOR

Final Orders / Judgements

10-04-2026
ORDER

Case Summary: R. EXE. NO. 14/2026 The court dismissed the execution petition filed by PGVCL Sanosara Sub Division Sihor against respondent Jayubhai Bhikhabhai Gohil for default. The court found that the respondent failed to appear before the court despite being served notice for warrant execution proceedings, and his continued non-cooperation prevented progress of the case. The court held that dismissing the petition for default due to the respondent's non-compliance was justified and reasonable, as he had been given adequate opportunity to appear and cooperate but failed to do so. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: R. EXE. NO. 14/2026 The court dismissed the execution petition filed by PGVCL Sanosara Sub Division Sihor against respondent Jayubhai Bhikhabhai Gohil for default. The court found that the respondent failed to appear before the court despite being served notice for warrant execution proceedings, and his continued non-cooperation prevented progress of the case. The court held that dismissing the petition for default due to the respondent's non-compliance was justified and reasonable, as he had been given adequate opportunity to appear and cooperate but failed to do so. 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, SIHOR All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case