PGVCL SANOSARA SUB DIVISION SIHOR vs JAYANYBHAI ARJANBHAI PARMAR — 18/2026

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

EXE R - EXECUTION PETITION - REGULAR

CNR: GJBN080000512026

Case disposed

Filing Number

18/2026

Filing Date

13-01-2026

Registration No

18/2026

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)

JAYANYBHAI ARJANBHAI PARMAR

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. 18/2026 PGVCL Sanosara Sub Division Sihor v. Jayanybhai Arjanbhai Parmar The court dismissed the petition for default against the respondent due to non-compliance with procedural requirements. Although the respondent was given notice and directed to appear for warrant execution proceedings, he failed to present himself in court despite being afforded adequate opportunity. The court held that dismissing the case for default was justified given the respondent's consistent non-appearance and lack of cooperation in advancing the matter, and directed that the respondent must appear before the court without further delay to comply with the Supreme Court's directive within six months, failing which the case would be dismissed as the respondent's default. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: R. EXE. NO. 18/2026 PGVCL Sanosara Sub Division Sihor v. Jayanybhai Arjanbhai Parmar The court dismissed the petition for default against the respondent due to non-compliance with procedural requirements. Although the respondent was given notice and directed to appear for warrant execution proceedings, he failed to present himself in court despite being afforded adequate opportunity. The court held that dismissing the case for default was justified given the respondent's consistent non-appearance and lack of cooperation in advancing the matter, and directed that the respondent must appear before the court without further delay to comply with the Supreme Court's directive within six months, failing which the case would be dismissed as the respondent's default. 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