PGVCL BOTAD TOWN 1 vs BHAVESHBHAI POLABHAI DHANDHAL — 42/2025
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section O21,R11. Disposed: Uncontested--DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT on 13th March 2026.
EXE R - EXECUTION PETITION - REGULAR
CNR: GJBT020097392025
Filing Number
42/2025
Filing Date
06-Aug-2025
Registration No
42/2025
Registration Date
06-Aug-2025
Court
CIVIL COURT, BOTAD
Judge
3-Principal Senior CIVIL Judge
Decision Date
13-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT
Last updated 31-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.PGVCL BOTAD TOWN 1
Adv. K G DABHI
Respondent(s)
-
1.BHAVESHBHAI POLABHAI DHANDHAL
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
13-Mar-2026
OrderView PDF
The court dismissed the petition filed by PGVCL Botad Town 1 as default due to the petitioner's lack of interest in pursuing the case. The court noted that the petition was very old, notices had been issued multiple times to the respondent without proper identification of property or the respondent, and the petitioner failed to provide updated address details, indicating no genuine interest in proceeding. No costs were awarded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
13-Mar-2026
Disposed
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge
-
17-Feb-2026
Summons - Notice
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge
-
28-Jan-2026
Summons - Notice
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge
-
13-Jan-2026
Summons - Notice
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge
-
12-Dec-2025
Summons - Notice
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge
-
01-Dec-2025
Summons - Notice
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge
-
04-Nov-2025
Summons - Notice
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge
-
07-Oct-2025
Summons - Notice
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge
-
08-Sep-2025
Summons - Notice
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge
-
06-Aug-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
06-Aug-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 42/2025
The court dismissed the petition filed by PGVCL Botad Town 1 as default due to the petitioner's lack of interest in pursuing the case. The court noted that the petition was very old, notices had been issued multiple times to the respondent without proper identification of property or the respondent, and the petitioner failed to provide updated address details, indicating no genuine interest in proceeding. No costs were awarded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts