PGVCL BOTAD TOWN 1 vs ODHABHAI MANJIBHAI SAPARA — 46/2025
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section O21,R11. Disposed: Uncontested--DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT on 13th March 2026.
EXE R - EXECUTION PETITION - REGULAR
CNR: GJBT020097432025
Filing Number
46/2025
Filing Date
06-Aug-2025
Registration No
46/2025
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.ODHABHAI MANJIBHAI SAPARA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
13-Mar-2026
OrderView PDF
The court dismissed the petition filed by PGVCL Botad Town 1 against Odhabhai Manjibhai Sapara as default, finding that the petitioner lacked genuine interest in pursuing the case. Multiple garnishee warrants had been issued but remained unexecuted, and the petitioner's representative failed to appear at hearings despite repeated opportunities, demonstrating lack of diligence in prosecution. 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
Warrant Of Attachment
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge
-
28-Jan-2026
Warrant Of Attachment
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge
-
13-Jan-2026
Warrant Of Attachment
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge
-
12-Dec-2025
Warrant Of Attachment
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge
-
01-Dec-2025
Warrant Of Attachment
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge
-
04-Nov-2025
Warrant Of Attachment
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge
-
07-Oct-2025
Warrant Of Attachment
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge
-
08-Sep-2025
Warrant Of Attachment
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge
-
06-Aug-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
06-Aug-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 46/2025
The court dismissed the petition filed by PGVCL Botad Town 1 against Odhabhai Manjibhai Sapara as default, finding that the petitioner lacked genuine interest in pursuing the case. Multiple garnishee warrants had been issued but remained unexecuted, and the petitioner's representative failed to appear at hearings despite repeated opportunities, demonstrating lack of diligence in prosecution. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts