PGVCL GANDHIDHAM SUB DIVISION vs SHANKER VISHA BHANGI — 88/2025
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 151. Disposed: Uncontested--DISPOSED OF on 01st April 2026.
EXE R - EXECUTION PETITION - REGULAR
CNR: GJKT110115482025
Filing Number
88/2025
Filing Date
18-12-2025
Registration No
88/2025
Registration Date
18-12-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, GANDHIDHAM
Judge
33-4th ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE & A.C.J.M.
Decision Date
01st April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--DISPOSED OF
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
PGVCL GANDHIDHAM SUB DIVISION
Adv. T H MEHTA
Respondent(s)
SHANKER VISHA BHANGI
Hearing History
Judge: 33-4th ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE & A.C.J.M.
Disposed
SHOW-CAUSE NOTICE TO JUDGEMENT DEBTOR
SHOW-CAUSE NOTICE TO JUDGEMENT DEBTOR
SHOW-CAUSE NOTICE TO JUDGEMENT DEBTOR
SHOW-CAUSE NOTICE TO JUDGEMENT DEBTOR
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 01-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 18-03-2026 | SHOW-CAUSE NOTICE TO JUDGEMENT DEBTOR |
| 11-03-2026 | SHOW-CAUSE NOTICE TO JUDGEMENT DEBTOR |
| 11-02-2026 | SHOW-CAUSE NOTICE TO JUDGEMENT DEBTOR |
| 03-02-2026 | SHOW-CAUSE NOTICE TO JUDGEMENT DEBTOR |
Final Orders / Judgements
The 4th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Gandhidham dismissed the execution petition filed by PGVCL against judgment debtor Shankar Visa Bhangi for want of a correct address. The court found that despite two adjournments and ample opportunities, the decree holder failed to provide an updated address after the original notice returned unserved, making execution impossible. The court invoked Supreme Court directives emphasizing timely decree execution and declined further adjournments given the five-month delay. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The 4th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Gandhidham dismissed the execution petition filed by PGVCL against judgment debtor Shankar Visa Bhangi for want of a correct address. The court found that despite two adjournments and ample opportunities, the decree holder failed to provide an updated address after the original notice returned unserved, making execution impossible. The court invoked Supreme Court directives emphasizing timely decree execution and declined further adjournments given the five-month delay. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts