STATE BANK OF INDIA vs HARDASBHAI GORDHANBHAI MONPARA Advocate - H S HIRANI — 30/2025

Case under Limitation Act, 1963 Section 5,. Disposed: Contested--JUDGEMENT on 06th March 2026.

CMA DC - CIVIL MISC. APPLICATION - DISTRICT COURT

CNR: GJJN200005512025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

30/2025

Filing Date

20-12-2025

Registration No

30/2025

Registration Date

20-12-2025

Court

Additional Court, Visavadar

Judge

1-4th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE

Decision Date

06th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGEMENT

Acts & Sections

LIMITATION ACT, 1963 Section 5,

Petitioner(s)

STATE BANK OF INDIA

Adv. D M SHAH

Respondent(s)

HARDASBHAI GORDHANBHAI MONPARA Advocate - H S HIRANI

Hearing History

Judge: 1-4th ADDL DISTRICT JUDGE

06-03-2026

Disposed

05-03-2026

ORDER

12-02-2026

REPLY

07-02-2026

REPLY

05-02-2026

NOTICE TO OPPONENTS

Final Orders / Judgements

06-03-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Summary The 4th Additional District Judge, Visavadar disallowed State Bank of India's application seeking condonation of 811 days delay in filing an appeal against a loan recovery suit dismissal. The court found that SBI's explanation—non-communication from its advocate and officer transfer—was unsatisfactory, as an institutional litigant must maintain vigilant records and administrative systems to track pending cases. The court also noted SBI made contradictory statements, having earlier filed a related application in May 2024, undermining its claim of learning about the judgment only in November 2025. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The 4th Additional District Judge, Visavadar disallowed State Bank of India's application seeking condonation of 811 days delay in filing an appeal against a loan recovery suit dismissal. The court found that SBI's explanation—non-communication from its advocate and officer transfer—was unsatisfactory, as an institutional litigant must maintain vigilant records and administrative systems to track pending cases. The court also noted SBI made contradictory statements, having earlier filed a related application in May 2024, undermining its claim of learning about the judgment only in November 2025. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

Additional Court, Visavadar All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case