PGVCL BOTAD TOWN 1 vs DECEASED GIRDHARBHAI THAKARBHAI MORI CHAUHAN LEGAL HEIR OF VIJAYBHAI GIRDHARBHAI MORI CHAUHAN — 61/2025
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section O21,R11. Disposed: Uncontested--DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT on 13th March 2026.
EXE R - EXECUTION PETITION - REGULAR
CNR: GJBT020097882025
Filing Number
61/2025
Filing Date
11-Aug-2025
Registration No
61/2025
Registration Date
11-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.DECEASED GIRDHARBHAI THAKARBHAI MORI CHAUHAN LEGAL HEIR OF VIJAYBHAI GIRDHARBHAI MORI CHAUHAN
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
13-Mar-2026
OrderView PDF
The court dismissed the petition filed by PGVCL BOTAD TOWN 1 due to default. The court noted that the case was pending for a considerable time, multiple attachment warrants had been issued, and the petitioner's representative failed to appear despite several notices, demonstrating lack of interest in pursuing the matter. Consequently, the petition was dismissed for default, with no order on costs. 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
-
09-Sep-2025
Warrant Of Attachment
Principal Senior CIVIL Judge
-
11-Aug-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
11-Aug-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 61/2025
The court dismissed the petition filed by PGVCL BOTAD TOWN 1 due to default. The court noted that the case was pending for a considerable time, multiple attachment warrants had been issued, and the petitioner's representative failed to appear despite several notices, demonstrating lack of interest in pursuing the matter. Consequently, the petition was dismissed for default, with no order on costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts