DAYA PANCHA vs STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - R.V.RAVEL — 142/2008
Case under Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Section 018. Disposed: Uncontested--DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT on 13th April 2026.
LAR - LAND ACQUISITION REFERENCE CASE
CNR: GJJM030028242017
Filing Number
142/2008
Filing Date
18-11-2017
Registration No
142/2008
Registration Date
23-07-2008
Court
TALUKA COURT, LALPUR
Judge
2-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
Decision Date
13th April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
DAYA PANCHA
Adv. J A VYAS
Respondent(s)
STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - R.V.RAVEL
Hearing History
Judge: 2-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
Disposed
SUMMONS - NOTICE
SUMMONS - NOTICE
SUMMONS - NOTICE
SUMMONS - NOTICE
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 13-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 16-03-2026 | SUMMONS - NOTICE |
| 03-03-2026 | SUMMONS - NOTICE |
| 17-02-2026 | SUMMONS - NOTICE |
| 09-02-2026 | SUMMONS - NOTICE |
Final Orders / Judgements
SUMMARY The Primary Senior Civil Court dismissed petitioner Daya Pancha's Land Acquisition Reference (L.A.R. No. 142/2008) under Order 9 Rule 9 of the CPC on 13 April 2026. After the Gujarat High Court remanded the case for reconsideration with directions for parties to submit evidence within four weeks, the petitioner failed to appear on multiple hearing dates (03.03.2026 and 16.03.2026) and did not present on the final hearing date, breaching their undertaking before the High Court. The court found dismissal for default was the only alternative given the petitioner's non-compliance and lack of evidence submission. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
SUMMARY The Primary Senior Civil Court dismissed petitioner Daya Pancha's Land Acquisition Reference (L.A.R. No. 142/2008) under Order 9 Rule 9 of the CPC on 13 April 2026. After the Gujarat High Court remanded the case for reconsideration with directions for parties to submit evidence within four weeks, the petitioner failed to appear on multiple hearing dates (03.03.2026 and 16.03.2026) and did not present on the final hearing date, breaching their undertaking before the High Court. The court found dismissal for default was the only alternative given the petitioner's non-compliance and lack of evidence submission. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts