DODIYA BALVANTBHAI BHAGVANBHAI vs Government of Gujarat Advocate - V G MANDALIYA — 281/2025

Case under Limitation Act, 1963 Section 5. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 11th May 2026.

CRMA S - CRIMINAL MISC. APPLICATION - SESSIONS

CNR: GJBN220006492025

Case disposed

Filing Number

281/2025

Filing Date

18-11-2025

Registration No

281/2025

Registration Date

18-11-2025

Court

ADDL COURT-TALAJA

Judge

1-ADDL.DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE

Decision Date

11th May 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

FIR Details

FIR Number

34

Police Station

TALAJA POLICE STATION - BHAVNAGAR DISTRICT

Year

2014

Acts & Sections

Limitation Act, 1963 Section 5

Petitioner(s)

DODIYA BALVANTBHAI BHAGVANBHAI

Respondent(s)

Government of Gujarat Advocate - V G MANDALIYA

Hearing History

Judge: 1-ADDL.DISTRICT & SESSIONS JUDGE

11-05-2026

Disposed

08-05-2026

ORDER

07-05-2026

ORDER

06-05-2026

ORDER

04-05-2026

ORDER

Final Orders / Judgements

11-05-2026
ORDER

Case Summary: 281/2025 Dodiya Balvantbhai Bhagvanbhai v. Government of Gujarat The court rejected the petitioner's plea seeking condonation of delay in filing an appeal against trial court orders. The court found that the petitioner failed to provide adequate reasons for the 8.5-year delay in approaching the appellate authority, had made multiple ineffective attempts before the trial court without persistence, and lacked legal representation or financial justification for the delay. The court held that while principles of liberal condonation exist, they require "sufficient cause"—which was absent here—and dismissed the petition as the petitioner could not demonstrate grounds warranting exception to procedural timelines. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 281/2025 Dodiya Balvantbhai Bhagvanbhai v. Government of Gujarat The court rejected the petitioner's plea seeking condonation of delay in filing an appeal against trial court orders. The court found that the petitioner failed to provide adequate reasons for the 8.5-year delay in approaching the appellate authority, had made multiple ineffective attempts before the trial court without persistence, and lacked legal representation or financial justification for the delay. The court held that while principles of liberal condonation exist, they require "sufficient cause"—which was absent here—and dismissed the petition as the petitioner could not demonstrate grounds warranting exception to procedural timelines. 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

ADDL COURT-TALAJA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case