SHREE RAM FINANCE LTD THROU POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER DILIP PUNJABHAI DUVA vs SANJAYKUMAR BHIMASHIBHAI NANDANIYA — 2940/2025

Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138,142. Disposed: Uncontested--LOK ADALA on 14th March 2026.

Case disposed

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJDW020041052025

Filing Number

2940/2025

Filing Date

04-Dec-2025

Registration No

2940/2025

Registration Date

04-Dec-2025

Court

CIVIL COURT, KHAMBHALIA

Judge

2-Chief Judicial Magistrate & Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge

Decision Date

14-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--LOK ADALA

Last updated 10-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138,142

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SHREE RAM FINANCE LTD THROU POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER DILIP PUNJABHAI DUVA

    Adv. H V BANDHIYA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SANJAYKUMAR BHIMASHIBHAI NANDANIYA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 14-Mar-2026

    Order

    The court dismissed the petitioner's case against the respondent. The court found the petitioner's claims lacking merit and directed the case to be dismissed under CrPC Section 280, while acquitting the respondent of charges. Case fees were also imposed on the petitioner. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 14-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Chief Judicial Magistrate & Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge

  4. 21-Feb-2026

    Process To Accused

    Chief Judicial Magistrate & Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge

  5. 12-Jan-2026

    Process To Accused

    Chief Judicial Magistrate & Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge

  6. 02-Jan-2026

    Process To Accused

    Chief Judicial Magistrate & Addl. Sr. CIVIL Judge

  7. 04-Dec-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  8. 04-Dec-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 2940/2025

casestatus.in Summary

The court dismissed the petitioner's case against the respondent. The court found the petitioner's claims lacking merit and directed the case to be dismissed under CrPC Section 280, while acquitting the respondent of charges. Case fees were also imposed on the petitioner. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case