THE KALUPUR COMM CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD vs KEVAL INDUSTRIES (PARTNERSHIP FIRM) — 1/2021
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 9,. Status: SALE OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY. Next hearing: 11th May 2026.
EXE S - EXECUTION PETITION - SPECIAL
CNR: GJKH110013392021
Next Hearing
11th May 2026
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
1/2021
Filing Date
28-09-2021
Registration No
1/2021
Registration Date
28-09-2021
Court
TALUKA COURT, KHEDA
Judge
3-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
THE KALUPUR COMM CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD
Adv. C P SHAH
Respondent(s)
KEVAL INDUSTRIES (PARTNERSHIP FIRM)
RASHMIKANTBHAI RATILAL PATEL
MRS. SHARMISHTABEN RASMINBHAI PATEL
KEVANBHAI RASMINBHAI PATEL
NARENDRABHAI GANPATBHAI PATEL
BHARATBHAI MANGALDAS PATEL
DHARMENDRABHAI RATILAL PATEL
Hearing History
Judge: 3-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM
SALE OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY
SALE OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY
SALE OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY
FINAL ORDER
HEARING ON OBJECTIONS
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 22-04-2026 | SALE OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY | |
| 09-03-2026 | SALE OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY | |
| 09-02-2026 | SALE OF IMMOVABLE PROPERTY | |
| 31-01-2026 | FINAL ORDER | |
| 15-01-2026 | HEARING ON OBJECTIONS |
Interim Orders
Summary The court rejected Defendant No. 7's objection application challenging the execution proceedings for a Rs. 4,49,40,822 arbitration award. The court found that notices were properly served (to the defendant's sister-in-law, his son, and via RPAD) as per CPC Order 5, Rule 15, and the defendant's repeated non-appearance and refusal to accept notices constituted intentional avoidance rather than improper service. No cost awarded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The court rejected Defendant No. 7's objection application challenging the execution proceedings for a Rs. 4,49,40,822 arbitration award. The court found that notices were properly served (to the defendant's sister-in-law, his son, and via RPAD) as per CPC Order 5, Rule 15, and the defendant's repeated non-appearance and refusal to accept notices constituted intentional avoidance rather than improper service. No cost awarded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts