PGVCL SANOSARA SUB DIVISION SIHOR vs GUJ. NARSANGBHAI RAMJIBHAI GOHILNA VARSO BHUPATBHAI NARSANGBHAI — 29/2026
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 51,34. Disposed: Uncontested--DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT on 10th April 2026.
EXE R - EXECUTION PETITION - REGULAR
CNR: GJBN080000622026
Filing Number
29/2026
Filing Date
13-01-2026
Registration No
29/2026
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
Petitioner(s)
PGVCL SANOSARA SUB DIVISION SIHOR
Adv. P B HARMANI
Respondent(s)
GUJ. NARSANGBHAI RAMJIBHAI GOHILNA VARSO BHUPATBHAI NARSANGBHAI
Hearing History
Judge: 3-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
Disposed
WARRANT OF ATTACHMENT
SHOW-CAUSE NOTICE TO JUDGEMENT DEBTOR
SHOW-CAUSE NOTICE TO JUDGEMENT DEBTOR
SHOW-CAUSE NOTICE TO JUDGEMENT DEBTOR
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 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
Case Summary: R. EXE. NO. 29 OF 2026 The court dismissed the petition filed by PGVCL Sanosara Sub Division Sihor on the grounds that the respondent (Narsangbhai Ramjibhai Gohilna Varso Bhupatbhai Narsangbhai) failed to appear and cooperate in the execution proceedings despite being notified and given adequate opportunity to do so. The court held that the respondent's continued absence and non-cooperation constituted default, making it appropriate to dismiss the case under applicable legal provisions. No separate cost order was issued in this matter. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: R. EXE. NO. 29 OF 2026 The court dismissed the petition filed by PGVCL Sanosara Sub Division Sihor on the grounds that the respondent (Narsangbhai Ramjibhai Gohilna Varso Bhupatbhai Narsangbhai) failed to appear and cooperate in the execution proceedings despite being notified and given adequate opportunity to do so. The court held that the respondent's continued absence and non-cooperation constituted default, making it appropriate to dismiss the case under applicable legal provisions. No separate cost order was issued in this matter. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts