PGVCL SUB DIV DHOKADAVA vs MANUBHAI JERAMBHAI KAVAD — 29/2026

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 21. Disposed: Uncontested--DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT on 04th May 2026.

Case disposed

EXE R - EXECUTION PETITION - REGULAR

CNR: GJGS080001822026

Filing Number

29/2026

Filing Date

31-Jan-2026

Registration No

29/2026

Registration Date

31-Jan-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, GIRGADHADA

Judge

1-Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

04-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT

Last updated 07-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 21

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.PGVCL SUB DIV DHOKADAVA

    Adv. P P BHATT

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.MANUBHAI JERAMBHAI KAVAD

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 04-May-2026

    OrderView PDF

    The court dismissed the execution petition filed by PGVCL Sub Div Dhokadava against Manubhai Jerambhai Kavad for default of the decree holder. The judge found that despite the petition pending for service of process, no representative of the decree holder appeared in court, no applications were filed, and no steps were taken to proceed with the matter, indicating loss of interest. No costs were awarded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 04-May-2026

    Disposed

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  4. 27-Apr-2026

    Warrant Of Attachment

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  5. 06-Apr-2026

    Warrant Of Attachment

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  6. 13-Mar-2026

    Warrant Of Attachment

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  7. 02-Mar-2026

    Warrant Of Attachment

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  8. 23-Feb-2026

    Show-Cause Notice To Judgement Debtor

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  9. 31-Jan-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  10. 31-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 29/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court dismissed the execution petition filed by PGVCL Sub Div Dhokadava against Manubhai Jerambhai Kavad for default of the decree holder. The judge found that despite the petition pending for service of process, no representative of the decree holder appeared in court, no applications were filed, and no steps were taken to proceed with the matter, indicating loss of interest. No costs were awarded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case