Aartiben Hasmukhbhai Katudiya vs Natavarbhai Premjibhai Savani Advocate - K N YADAV — 1/2026

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section O33,R-1,2,151. Disposed: Uncontested--ALLOWED on 09th April 2026.

Case disposed

CMA DC - CIVIL MISC. APPLICATION - DISTRICT COURT

CNR: GJBT010001152026

Filing Number

1/2026

Filing Date

20-Jan-2026

Registration No

1/2026

Registration Date

20-Jan-2026

Court

DISTRICT COURT, BOTAD

Judge

1-Principal District Judge

Decision Date

09-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--ALLOWED

Last updated 11-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section O33,R-1,2,151

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Aartiben Hasmukhbhai Katudiya

    Adv. M S SOMANI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Natavarbhai Premjibhai Savani Advocate - K N YADAV

  2. 2.The State of Gujarat

    Adv. DGP

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 09-Apr-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The court allowed Aartiben Hasmukhbhai Katudiya's application to sue as an indigent person under Order 33, Rule 1 of CPC, finding he possessed no immovable property and insufficient movable assets. Rejecting the State's argument for lack of documentary proof, the court held that constitutional rights to equal access to justice cannot be denied based on financial inability, and permitted his appeal against the lower court's order to be registered. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 09-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Principal District Judge

  4. 08-Apr-2026

    Hearing

    Principal District Judge

  5. 25-Mar-2026

    Written Statement

    Principal District Judge

  6. 16-Mar-2026

    Appearance Of Party/Pleader

    Principal District Judge

  7. 25-Feb-2026

    Summons - Notice

    Principal District Judge

  8. 20-Feb-2026

    Hearing

    Principal District Judge

  9. 20-Jan-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  10. 20-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 1/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court allowed Aartiben Hasmukhbhai Katudiya's application to sue as an indigent person under Order 33, Rule 1 of CPC, finding he possessed no immovable property and insufficient movable assets. Rejecting the State's argument for lack of documentary proof, the court held that constitutional rights to equal access to justice cannot be denied based on financial inability, and permitted his appeal against the lower court's order to be registered. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case