SURESHKUMAR GANESHBHAI PARMAR vs VIKRAMSINH NATVARSINH CHAVADA — 26/2025

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 21,32. Disposed: Uncontested--DISMISSED on 05th May 2026.

Case disposed

MACEX - MAC EXECUTION PETITION

CNR: GJMH150019642025

Filing Number

26/2025

Filing Date

18-Nov-2025

Registration No

26/2025

Registration Date

18-Nov-2025

Court

ADDL. DISTRICT COURT, VISNAGAR

Judge

4-Addl. District Judge

Decision Date

05-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--DISMISSED

Last updated 06-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 21,32

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SURESHKUMAR GANESHBHAI PARMAR

    Adv. D M PRAJAPATI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.VIKRAMSINH NATVARSINH CHAVADA

  2. 2.RAJESHKUMAR KANTILAL PATEL

  3. 3.GAUTAMKUMAR GANESHBHAI PATEL

  4. 4.NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 05-May-2026

    Order

    The court (MACEX No. 26/2025, Mehsana) ordered the dismissal of the petition as the insurance company confirmed that all required amounts have been deposited and the petitioner has already withdrawn the funds through a separate application (M.A.C.M.A. No. 96/2026). The order was passed on May 5, 2026, noting the petitioner's prolonged absence from hearings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 05-May-2026

    Disposed

    Addl. District Judge

  4. 28-Apr-2026

    Reply

    Addl. District Judge

  5. 07-Apr-2026

    Reply

    Addl. District Judge

  6. 10-Mar-2026

    Reply

    Addl. District Judge

  7. 24-Feb-2026

    Reply

    Addl. District Judge

  8. 03-Feb-2026

    Reply

    Addl. District Judge

  9. 06-Jan-2026

    Process Of Execution

    Addl. District Judge

  10. 09-Dec-2025

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  11. 18-Nov-2025

    Case filed

    Registration No. 26/2025

casestatus.in Summary

The court (MACEX No. 26/2025, Mehsana) ordered the dismissal of the petition as the insurance company confirmed that all required amounts have been deposited and the petitioner has already withdrawn the funds through a separate application (M.A.C.M.A. No. 96/2026). The order was passed on May 5, 2026, noting the petitioner's prolonged absence from hearings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case