State Bank Of India vs Bhikhabhai Bhimabhai Modhvadiya Advocate - H P TEVANI — 33/2025

Case under Contract Act, 1872 Section 71,72. Disposed: Contested--JUDGEMENT on 10th April 2026.

RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT

CNR: GJPB030006542025

Case disposed

Filing Number

33/2025

Filing Date

24-06-2025

Registration No

33/2025

Registration Date

24-06-2025

Court

TALUKA COURT-RANAVAV

Judge

1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

10th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--JUDGEMENT

Acts & Sections

CONTRACT ACT, 1872 Section 71,72

Petitioner(s)

State Bank Of India

Adv. N M SATYADEV

Respondent(s)

Bhikhabhai Bhimabhai Modhvadiya Advocate - H P TEVANI

Hearing History

Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C

10-04-2026

Disposed

09-04-2026

JUDGEMENT

25-03-2026

JUDGEMENT

17-03-2026

JUDGEMENT

13-03-2026

FINAL ARGUMENTS

Final Orders / Judgements

10-04-2026
JUDEGEMENT

Case Summary: State Bank of India v. Bhikhabhai Bhimabhai Modhvadiya The court dismissed SBI's suit for recovery of Rs. 7,28,372 as barred by limitation. SBI failed to prove it furnished the loan on the alleged date and did not provide sufficient evidence of the debt's quantum, account details, or interest calculations. The respondent's admission in pleadings regarding the loan was treated as conclusive, but SBI lacked corroborating documentation and issued the notice to repay only 16 years later in 2024, after the three-year limitation period expired. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: State Bank of India v. Bhikhabhai Bhimabhai Modhvadiya The court dismissed SBI's suit for recovery of Rs. 7,28,372 as barred by limitation. SBI failed to prove it furnished the loan on the alleged date and did not provide sufficient evidence of the debt's quantum, account details, or interest calculations. The respondent's admission in pleadings regarding the loan was treated as conclusive, but SBI lacked corroborating documentation and issued the notice to repay only 16 years later in 2024, after the three-year limitation period expired. 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

TALUKA COURT-RANAVAV All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case