PGVCL SANOSARA SUB DIVISION SIHOR vs GOHIL RAGHUVIRSINH NAVALSINH — 28/2026

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

Case disposed

EXE R - EXECUTION PETITION - REGULAR

CNR: GJBN080000612026

Filing Number

28/2026

Filing Date

13-Jan-2026

Registration No

28/2026

Registration Date

13-Jan-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, SIHOR

Judge

3-Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

Decision Date

10-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT

Last updated 31-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 51,34

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.PGVCL SANOSARA SUB DIVISION SIHOR

    Adv. P B HARMANI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.GOHIL RAGHUVIRSINH NAVALSINH

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 10-Apr-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The court dismissed the execution petition filed by PGVCL Sanosara Sub Division against Gohil Raghuvirsinh Navalsinh due to the respondent's non-cooperation and repeated absence from court proceedings despite notices. The court found that since adequate time had already been provided and the respondent showed no willingness to comply with the warrant of attachment proceedings, dismissing the petition for default was justified and appropriate under the circumstances. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 10-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  4. 13-Mar-2026

    Warrant Of Attachment

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  5. 19-Feb-2026

    Show-Cause Notice To Judgement Debtor

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  6. 05-Feb-2026

    Show-Cause Notice To Judgement Debtor

    Principal Senior CIVIL Judge & Addl. CJM

  7. 13-Jan-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  8. 13-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 28/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court dismissed the execution petition filed by PGVCL Sanosara Sub Division against Gohil Raghuvirsinh Navalsinh due to the respondent's non-cooperation and repeated absence from court proceedings despite notices. The court found that since adequate time had already been provided and the respondent showed no willingness to comply with the warrant of attachment proceedings, dismissing the petition for default was justified and appropriate under the circumstances. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case