GOGANBHAI KHIMJIBHAI vs STATE OF GUJARAT Advocate - R.V.RAVEL — 149/2008
Case under Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Section 018. Disposed: Uncontested--DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT on 13th April 2026.
LAR - LAND ACQUISITION REFERENCE CASE
CNR: GJJM030028382017
Filing Number
149/2008
Filing Date
18-11-2017
Registration No
149/2008
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)
GOGANBHAI KHIMJIBHAI
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 of L.A.R. No. 149/2008 The Primary Senior Civil Court, Lalpur dismissed petitioner Goganbhai Khimjibhai's land acquisition reference against the State of Gujarat for default under Order 9 Rule 9 of CPC. After the Gujarat High Court remanded the case for reconsideration with directions for parties to submit evidence within four weeks, the petitioner repeatedly failed to appear in court on multiple scheduled dates (09.02.2026, 03.03.2026, and 16.03.2026) without filing any adjournment application or submitting supporting evidence, thereby breaching their undertaking before the High Court. Each party bears their own costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Interim Orders
Summary of L.A.R. No. 149/2008 The Primary Senior Civil Court, Lalpur dismissed petitioner Goganbhai Khimjibhai's land acquisition reference against the State of Gujarat for default under Order 9 Rule 9 of CPC. After the Gujarat High Court remanded the case for reconsideration with directions for parties to submit evidence within four weeks, the petitioner repeatedly failed to appear in court on multiple scheduled dates (09.02.2026, 03.03.2026, and 16.03.2026) without filing any adjournment application or submitting supporting evidence, thereby breaching their undertaking before the High Court. Each party bears their own costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts