DIPTIBEN MANISHKUMAR LATHIGRA vs MANAGER OF BANK OF BARODA — 17/2020

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 10,. Disposed: Contested--REJECTED on 20th March 2026.

CMA SC - CIVIL MISC. APPLICATION - SR/CIVIL/SMALL CAUSE COU

CNR: GJNV020096622020

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

17/2020

Filing Date

29-10-2020

Registration No

17/2020

Registration Date

29-10-2020

Court

CIVIL COURT, NAVSARI

Judge

1-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM

Decision Date

20th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--REJECTED

Acts & Sections

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 Section 10,

Petitioner(s)

DIPTIBEN MANISHKUMAR LATHIGRA

Adv. V.A.NAIK

Respondent(s)

MANAGER OF BANK OF BARODA

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOM TAX

KHURDINO SUGANDI

HARESH G. SUGANDHI

KAMLABEN G. SUGANDHI

SAPNA S. SUGANDHI

GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT

DHAVAL MANISHKUMAR LATHIGARA

KRINA MANISHKUMAR LATHIGRA

SUNILBHAI VRAJLAL LATHIGRA

SONALBEN VRAJLAL LATHIGRA

JITENDRA VRAJLAL LATHIGRA

PARUL VRAJLAL LATHIGRA W/O BHAVESH CHOKSI

Hearing History

Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE & ADDL. CJM

20-03-2026

Disposed

16-03-2026

NOTICE TO OPPONENTS

09-03-2026

NOTICE TO OPPONENTS

06-03-2026

NOTICE TO OPPONENTS

29-01-2026

NOTICE TO OPPONENTS

Final Orders / Judgements

20-03-2026
ORDER

Summary The court dismissed the plaint under Order 7, Rule 11 of the CPC, finding that the case was barred under Section 243 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, which provides that proceedings under the repealed Presidency Towns Insolvency Act, 1909 and Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920 should continue under those old Acts and cannot be transferred to new proceedings. The court held that the plaintiff's suit disclosed no cause of action and was manifestly vexatious, as it attempted to circumvent the statutory bar through clever drafting. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The court dismissed the plaint under Order 7, Rule 11 of the CPC, finding that the case was barred under Section 243 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, which provides that proceedings under the repealed Presidency Towns Insolvency Act, 1909 and Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920 should continue under those old Acts and cannot be transferred to new proceedings. The court held that the plaintiff's suit disclosed no cause of action and was manifestly vexatious, as it attempted to circumvent the statutory bar through clever drafting. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

CIVIL COURT, NAVSARI All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case