ANKURBHAI UMESHCHANDRA CHAUHAN POWER OF ATTORNEY OF SHREE RAM FINANCE LTD vs HASMITABEN VIJAYKUMAR SOLANKI Advocate - V R VARIA — 1983/2025

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

CC - CRIMINAL CASE

CNR: GJPM040027732025

Case disposed

Filing Number

1983/2025

Filing Date

11-08-2025

Registration No

1983/2025

Registration Date

13-08-2025

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)

ANKURBHAI UMESHCHANDRA CHAUHAN POWER OF ATTORNEY OF SHREE RAM FINANCE LTD

Adv. B M MAKARANI

Respondent(s)

HASMITABEN VIJAYKUMAR SOLANKI Advocate - V R VARIA

Hearing History

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

14-03-2026

Disposed

13-03-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

12-03-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

30-01-2026

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

10-12-2025

EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTION

Final Orders / Judgements

14-03-2026
ORDER

The court dismissed the petition filed under Order 20 of the CPC, holding that the petitioner failed to establish sufficient grounds for the case to proceed further. The court also acquitted the respondent, rejecting the allegations against them. Considering the respondent's financial circumstances and citing the Supreme Court's guidelines in Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H, the court declined to direct deposit of any amount in legal services authority. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The court dismissed the petition filed under Order 20 of the CPC, holding that the petitioner failed to establish sufficient grounds for the case to proceed further. The court also acquitted the respondent, rejecting the allegations against them. Considering the respondent's financial circumstances and citing the Supreme Court's guidelines in Damodar S. Prabhu v. Sayed Babalal H, the court declined to direct deposit of any amount in legal services authority. 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