HEIRS OF DECEASED PRAVINSINH GANAPATSINH RAULAJI 1. SANGITABEN PRAVINSINH RAULAJI vs KAMLESHKUMAR HIMMATSINH SOLANKI — 56/2025
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 21.1. Disposed: Uncontested--LOK ADALAT on 14th March 2026.
MACEX - MAC EXECUTION PETITION
CNR: GJPM010041922025
Filing Number
56/2025
Filing Date
09-Dec-2025
Registration No
56/2025
Registration Date
09-Dec-2025
Court
DISTRICT AND SESSIONS COURT GODHRA
Judge
19-6th Addl District Judge
Decision Date
14-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--LOK ADALAT
Last updated 07-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.HEIRS OF DECEASED PRAVINSINH GANAPATSINH RAULAJI 1. SANGITABEN PRAVINSINH RAULAJI
Respondent(s)
-
1.KAMLESHKUMAR HIMMATSINH SOLANKI
-
2.GIRISHKUMAR JETHABHAI PARMAR
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
14-Mar-2026
OrderView PDF
The court dismissed the petition filed by the heirs of deceased Pravinsinh Ganapatsinh Raulaji against respondents Kamleshkumar Himmatsinh Solanki and Girishkumar Jethabhai Parmar. The judgment, dated March 14, 2026, held that since the settlement dispute between the parties had been resolved and compensation awarded by the government to the respondents, there was no further basis for continuing litigation, and accordingly the writ petition was rejected. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
14-Mar-2026
Disposed
6th Addl District Judge
-
13-Mar-2026
Warrant Of Attachment
6th Addl District Judge
-
21-Feb-2026
Warrant Of Attachment
6th Addl District Judge
-
31-Jan-2026
Warrant Of Attachment
6th Addl District Judge
-
03-Jan-2026
Show-Cause Notice To Judgement Debtor
6th Addl District Judge
-
20-Dec-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
09-Dec-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 56/2025
The court dismissed the petition filed by the heirs of deceased Pravinsinh Ganapatsinh Raulaji against respondents Kamleshkumar Himmatsinh Solanki and Girishkumar Jethabhai Parmar. The judgment, dated March 14, 2026, held that since the settlement dispute between the parties had been resolved and compensation awarded by the government to the respondents, there was no further basis for continuing litigation, and accordingly the writ petition was rejected. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts