VARUNKUMAR NAVINCHANDRA PARIKH ON BEHALF OF THE HALOL URBAN CO OP BANK LIMITED vs HARISHBHAI PRAFULBHAI SOLANKI Advocate - K M PARMAR — 1252/2025

Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138. Disposed: Uncontested--LOK ADALAT on 14th March 2026.

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJPM040019162025

Case disposed

Filing Number

1252/2025

Filing Date

07-07-2025

Registration No

1252/2025

Registration Date

07-07-2025

Court

TALUKA COURT, HALOL

Judge

3-ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE & A.C.J.M.

Decision Date

14th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--LOK ADALAT

Acts & Sections

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138

Petitioner(s)

VARUNKUMAR NAVINCHANDRA PARIKH ON BEHALF OF THE HALOL URBAN CO OP BANK LIMITED

Adv. H J KASSOWAL

Respondent(s)

HARISHBHAI PRAFULBHAI SOLANKI Advocate - K M PARMAR

Hearing History

Judge: 3-ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE & A.C.J.M.

14-03-2026

Disposed

13-03-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

26-02-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

08-01-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

05-12-2025

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

Final Orders / Judgements

14-03-2026
ORDER

Case Summary: C.C.No.1252/2025 The Halol Urban Co-op Bank Limited challenged proceedings under Order 21 of the Civil Procedure Code, alleging the case cannot proceed against the accused without proper legal authorization. The court dismissed the petition, holding the case can proceed and acquitting the accused, while declining to deposit any amount in a legal services authority as per Supreme Court guidelines in Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H, deeming such deposit unjustified given the accused's financial circumstances. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: C.C.No.1252/2025 The Halol Urban Co-op Bank Limited challenged proceedings under Order 21 of the Civil Procedure Code, alleging the case cannot proceed against the accused without proper legal authorization. The court dismissed the petition, holding the case can proceed and acquitting the accused, while declining to deposit any amount in a legal services authority as per Supreme Court guidelines in Damodar S. Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H, deeming such deposit unjustified given the accused's financial circumstances. 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, HALOL All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case