STATE BANK OF INDIA KHORASA THROUGH BRANCH MANAGER vs LAXMIBEN MERAMANBHAI JOTAVA — 5/2024
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 38. Disposed: Uncontested--DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT on 17th March 2026.
EXE R - EXECUTION PETITION - REGULAR
CNR: GJJN060003772024
Filing Number
5/2024
Filing Date
18-03-2024
Registration No
5/2024
Registration Date
18-03-2024
Court
TALUKA COURT, MALIA
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
17th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
STATE BANK OF INDIA KHORASA THROUGH BRANCH MANAGER
Adv. M S GOHEL
Respondent(s)
LAXMIBEN MERAMANBHAI JOTAVA
MALDEBHAI MERAMANBHAI JOTAVA
NARANBHAI MERAMANBHAI JOTAVA
RAJIBEN MERAMANBHAI JOTAVA
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
WARRANT OF ATTACHMENT
WARRANT OF ATTACHMENT
WARRANT OF ATTACHMENT
WARRANT OF ATTACHMENT
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 17-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 14-03-2026 | WARRANT OF ATTACHMENT |
| 13-03-2026 | WARRANT OF ATTACHMENT |
| 21-02-2026 | WARRANT OF ATTACHMENT |
| 04-02-2026 | WARRANT OF ATTACHMENT |
Final Orders / Judgements
The court dismissed both recovery cases (Civil Suit 1/2024 and 5/2024) filed by State Bank of India against the respondents due to the bank's gross negligence and non-compliance with court orders. The court found that the bank's branch manager failed to appear despite multiple summons over seven months, provided evasive responses through counsel, and made false claims about employee unavailability, demonstrating contempt of court procedures. Additionally, the court noted procedural irregularities including improper notice to respondents and the bank's failure to pursue amicable settlement, warranting dismissal of both suits with directions to release any attached property and conduct asset examination transparently. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The court dismissed both recovery cases (Civil Suit 1/2024 and 5/2024) filed by State Bank of India against the respondents due to the bank's gross negligence and non-compliance with court orders. The court found that the bank's branch manager failed to appear despite multiple summons over seven months, provided evasive responses through counsel, and made false claims about employee unavailability, demonstrating contempt of court procedures. Additionally, the court noted procedural irregularities including improper notice to respondents and the bank's failure to pursue amicable settlement, warranting dismissal of both suits with directions to release any attached property and conduct asset examination transparently. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts