MOHSIN M.YUSUF DANT vs PARMAR RASHMIKABEN VIRALKUMAR Advocate - H K SONI — 32/2025

Case Summary: SMST No. 32/2025 Court Decision: The Additional Civil Judge, Panchmahals rejected the defendant's leave to defend application and granted summary judgment for the plaintiff. The defendant was ordered to pay Rs. 2,50,000/- to the plaintiff. Key Reasoning: The court found that the defendant raised only vague, illusory, and contradictory defenses (denying knowledge of the plaintiff while simultaneously claiming his husband gave the cheque for vehicle dealings; claiming poverty while stating Rs. 6,000/- monthly income). The defendant's signature on the cheque was undisputed, and she failed to explain why she didn't retrieve the cheque if the alleged vehicle transaction remained incomplete. The court determined no substantial or triable defense existed, making the summary suit procedure appropriate for swift resolution in commercial matters. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.