HEIRS OF DECEASED AMBALAL MADHAVLAL(Legal Heir) vs GADHVI RATANBHAI DEVIDAN SELF AND A/O GADHVI DEVIDAN ISHWARDAS — 120/2019

Case under Limitation Act, 1963 Section 5. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 09th March 2026.

Case disposed

CMA DC - CIVIL MISC. APPLICATION - DISTRICT COURT

CNR: GJGN010036842019

Filing Number

120/2019

Filing Date

10-Jun-2019

Registration No

120/2019

Registration Date

10-Jun-2019

Court

DISTRICT COURT, GANDHINAGAR

Judge

1-Principal District & Sessions Judge

Decision Date

09-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

Last updated 16-Apr-2026

Acts & Sections

Limitation Act, 1963 Section 5

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.HEIRS OF DECEASED AMBALAL MADHAVLAL(Legal Heir)

    Adv. M R BHATT1.

  2. 2.KASHBEN WD/O AMBALAL PATEL

    Adv. M R BHATT1.

  3. 3.PATEL JASHIBEN AMBALAL

    Adv. M R BHATT1.

  4. 4.PATEL RAJESHBHAI AMBALAL

    Adv. M R BHATT1.

  5. 5.PATEL MADHUBEN AMBALAL

    Adv. M R BHATT1.

  6. 6.PATEL MANJULABEN AMBALAL

    Adv. M R BHATT

  7. 7.HEIRS OF DECEASD PATEL RAMANLAL MOHANLAL

    Adv. M R BHATT2.

  8. 8.DIVALIBEN WD/O RAMANBHAI PATEL

    Adv. M R BHATT2.

  9. 9.PATEL ATULKUMAR RAMANBHAI

    Adv. M R BHATT2.

  10. 10.PATEL ASHOKKUMAR RAMANBHAI

    Adv. M R BHATT2.

  11. 11.PATEL MUKESHKUMAR RAMANBHAI

    Adv. M R BHATT2.

  12. 12.PATEL ASHOKKUMAR RAMANBHAI A/O PATEL MEENABEN RAMANBHAI

    Adv. M R BHATT

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.GADHVI RATANBHAI DEVIDAN SELF AND A/O GADHVI DEVIDAN ISHWARDAS

  2. 2.HEIRS OF DECEASED GADHAVI UMEDBHAI PRABHUDAS THROUGH GADHAVI LAXMANBHAI UMEDDAS SELF(Legal Heir) 2.

  3. 3.DALUBEN WD/O LAXMANBHAI GADHAVI 2.

  4. 4.JASHUBHAI LAXMANBHAI GADHAVI 2.

  5. 5.POONAMBEN LAXMANBHAI GADHAVI 2.

  6. 6.DIPAKKUMAR LAXMANBHAI GADHAVI

    Adv. U P JANI

  7. 7.HEIRS OF YASHVANTBHAI GIRDHANBHAI SHAH(Legal Heir) 3.

  8. 8.ASHABEN YASHWANYBHAI SHAH 3.

  9. 9.HARSHADBHAI YASHWANTBHAI SHAH

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 09-Mar-2026

    JudegementView PDF

    Summary The Principal District Judge of Gandhinagar rejected the applicants' application for condonation of 161 days delay in filing an appeal against a November 2018 judgment. The court found the applicants' reasons insufficient, noting they failed to explain a critical 71-day gap between March 31 and June 10, 2019, and demonstrated negligence and lack of bona fides in pursuing the case. The court applied strict limitation principles, holding that without satisfactory explanation for the entire delay period, condonation cannot be granted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 09-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal District & Sessions Judge

  4. 02-Mar-2026

    Order

    Principal District & Sessions Judge

  5. 21-Feb-2026

    Final Arguments

    Principal District & Sessions Judge

  6. 31-Jan-2026

    Reply

    3rd Addl District Judge

  7. 18-Dec-2025

    Notice To Opponents

    3rd Addl District Judge

  8. 26-Nov-2025

    Notice To Opponents

    3rd Addl District Judge

  9. 07-Nov-2025

    Notice To Opponents

    3rd Addl District Judge

  10. 06-Oct-2025

    Notice To Opponents

    3rd Addl District Judge

  11. 08-Sep-2025

    Notice To Opponents

    3rd Addl District Judge

  12. 07-Aug-2025

    Notice To Opponents

    3rd Addl District Judge

  13. 18-Jun-2025

    Notice To Opponents

    4th Addl District Judge

  14. 08-Apr-2025

    Notice To Opponents

    3rd Addl District Judge

  15. 03-Mar-2025

    Notice To Opponents

    4th Addl District Judge

  16. 20-Jan-2025

    Notice To Opponents

    4th Addl District Judge

  17. 16-Dec-2024

    Notice To Opponents

    4th Addl District Judge

  18. 18-Nov-2024

    Notice To Opponents

    4th Addl District Judge

  19. 16-Oct-2024

    Notice To Opponents

    4th Addl District Judge

  20. 25-Sep-2024

    Notice To Opponents

    4th Addl District Judge

  21. 21-Aug-2024

    Notice To Opponents

    4th Addl District Judge

  22. 15-Jul-2024

    Notice To Opponents

    4th Addl District Judge

  23. 08-May-2024

    Notice To Opponents

    3rd Addl District Judge

  24. 21-Mar-2024

    Notice To Opponents

    3rd Addl District Judge

  25. 13-Feb-2024

    Notice To Opponents

    3rd Addl District Judge

  26. 26-Dec-2023

    Notice To Opponents

    3rd Addl District Judge

  27. 03-Nov-2023

    Notice To Opponents

    3rd Addl District Judge

  28. 20-Sep-2023

    Notice To Opponents

    3rd Addl District Judge

  29. 14-Aug-2023

    Notice To Opponents

    3rd Addl District Judge

  30. 20-Jun-2023

    Notice To Opponents

    3rd Addl District Judge

  31. 26-Apr-2023

    Notice To Opponents

    3rd Addl District Judge

  32. 23-Mar-2023

    Notice To Opponents

    3rd Addl District Judge

  33. 10-Feb-2023

    Notice To Opponents

    3rd Addl District Judge

  34. 12-Jan-2023

    Notice To Opponents

    3rd Addl District Judge

  35. 02-Dec-2022

    Notice To Opponents

    3rd Addl District Judge

  36. 21-Oct-2022

    Notice To Opponents

    3rd Addl District Judge

  37. 17-Sep-2022

    Notice To Opponents

    3rd Addl District Judge

  38. 04-Aug-2022

    Notice To Opponents

    Principal District & Sessions Judge

  39. 23-Jun-2022

    Notice To Opponents

    Principal District & Sessions Judge

  40. 20-Apr-2022

    Notice To Opponents

    2nd Addl District Judge

  41. 15-Mar-2022

    Notice To Opponents

    2nd Addl District Judge

  42. 21-Feb-2022

    Notice To Opponents

    2nd Addl District Judge

  43. 21-Jan-2022

    Notice To Opponents

    Principal District Judge

  44. 10-Dec-2021

    Notice To Opponents

    Principal District Judge

  45. 12-Nov-2021

    Notice To Opponents

    Principal District Judge

  46. 05-Oct-2021

    Notice To Opponents

    Principal District Judge

  47. 03-Sep-2021

    Notice To Opponents

    Principal District Judge

  48. 05-Aug-2021

    Notice To Opponents

    Principal District Judge

  49. 06-Jul-2021

    Notice To Opponents

    Principal District Judge

  50. 04-Jun-2021

    Notice To Opponents

    Principal District Judge

  51. 26-Apr-2021

    Notice To Opponents

    Principal District Judge

  52. 19-Mar-2021

    Notice To Opponents

    Principal District Judge

  53. 23-Feb-2021

    Notice To Opponents

    Principal District Judge

  54. 30-Jan-2021

    Notice To Opponents

    Principal District Judge

  55. 23-Dec-2020

    Notice To Opponents

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  56. 08-Dec-2020

    Notice To Opponents

    Addl.district & Sessions Judge

  57. 20-Oct-2020

    Notice To Opponents

    Principal District Judge

  58. 19-Sep-2020

    Notice To Opponents

    Principal District Judge

  59. 13-Aug-2020

    Notice To Opponents

    Principal District Judge

  60. 08-Jul-2020

    Notice To Opponents

    Principal District Judge

  61. 05-Jun-2020

    Notice To Opponents

    Principal District Judge

  62. 07-May-2020

    Notice To Opponents

    Principal District Judge

  63. 08-Apr-2020

    Notice To Opponents

    Principal District Judge

  64. 11-Mar-2020

    Notice To Opponents

    Principal District Judge

  65. 20-Feb-2020

    Notice To Opponents

    Principal District & Sessions Judge

  66. 23-Jan-2020

    Notice To Opponents

    Principal District & Sessions Judge

  67. 26-Dec-2019

    Notice To Opponents

    Principal District & Sessions Judge

  68. 10-Dec-2019

    Notice To Opponents

    Principal District & Sessions Judge

  69. 15-Nov-2019

    Notice To Opponents

    Principal District & Sessions Judge

  70. 05-Oct-2019

    Notice To Opponents

    Principal District & Sessions Judge

  71. 12-Sep-2019

    Notice To Opponents

    Principal District & Sessions Judge

  72. 20-Aug-2019

    Notice To Opponents

    Principal District & Sessions Judge

  73. 20-Jul-2019

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  74. 10-Jun-2019

    Case filed

    Registration No. 120/2019

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Principal District Judge of Gandhinagar rejected the applicants' application for condonation of 161 days delay in filing an appeal against a November 2018 judgment. The court found the applicants' reasons insufficient, noting they failed to explain a critical 71-day gap between March 31 and June 10, 2019, and demonstrated negligence and lack of bona fides in pursuing the case. The court applied strict limitation principles, holding that without satisfactory explanation for the entire delay period, condonation cannot be granted. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case