SOHIL HARAKHCHAND DEDHIYA PROPRIETOR OF MAHAVIR AND MULYA CO. vs MANAGER OF AGROCROPS INDIA P.V.LTD. Advocate - EX PARTY — 51/2024
Case under Specific Relief Act, 1963 Section 34. Disposed: Uncontested--EX-PARTE JUDGEMENT on 02nd May 2026.
RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT
CNR: GJKT040006132024
Filing Number
51/2024
Filing Date
24-04-2024
Registration No
51/2024
Registration Date
24-04-2024
Court
TALUKA COURT, MANDVI
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
02nd May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--EX-PARTE JUDGEMENT
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
SOHIL HARAKHCHAND DEDHIYA PROPRIETOR OF MAHAVIR AND MULYA CO.
Adv. A O MEMAN
Respondent(s)
MANAGER OF AGROCROPS INDIA P.V.LTD. Advocate - EX PARTY
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
FINAL ARGUMENTS
FINAL ARGUMENTS
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 02-05-2026 | Disposed |
| 29-04-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
| 22-04-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
| 09-04-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE |
| 11-03-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The court partially allowed the plaintiff's debt recovery claim against the defendant. The plaintiff successfully proved that the defendant owes ₹15,59,460 for goods (sesame seeds) purchased on credit, with payment still pending. The court ordered the defendant to pay this amount along with 18% annual interest from the date of the notice until full payment, with 6% interest thereafter. However, the court rejected the plaintiff's claim for full court costs and other ancillary reliefs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Decision Summary The court partially allowed the plaintiff's debt recovery claim against the defendant. The plaintiff successfully proved that the defendant owes ₹15,59,460 for goods (sesame seeds) purchased on credit, with payment still pending. The court ordered the defendant to pay this amount along with 18% annual interest from the date of the notice until full payment, with 6% interest thereafter. However, the court rejected the plaintiff's claim for full court costs and other ancillary reliefs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts