BARIYA ADITYA RAJENDRABHAI AUTHORISED PERSON OF SHALIBHADRA FINANCE LIMITED vs SONALBEN YOGENDRABHAI HARIJAN Advocate - P N SOLANKI — 2688/2025
Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138. Disposed: Uncontested--LOK ADALAT on 14th March 2026.
CC - CRIMINAL CASE
CNR: GJPM040035732025
Filing Number
2688/2025
Filing Date
16-Sep-2025
Registration No
2688/2025
Registration Date
16-Sep-2025
Court
TALUKA COURT, HALOL
Judge
4-Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
14-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--LOK ADALAT
Last updated 07-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.BARIYA ADITYA RAJENDRABHAI AUTHORISED PERSON OF SHALIBHADRA FINANCE LIMITED
Adv. K K SHAH
Respondent(s)
-
1.SONALBEN YOGENDRABHAI HARIJAN Advocate - P N SOLANKI
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
14-Mar-2026
Order
Case Summary: C.C.No.2688/2025 The court dismissed the civil case filed under Section 16 of the CPC, holding that the petitioner (Shalibhadra Finance Limited) failed to demonstrate grounds to proceed. The court ordered dismissal of the case and acquitted the respondent, while considering the respondent's financial circumstances in accordance with Supreme Court precedent regarding legal service authority involvement. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
14-Mar-2026
Disposed
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
13-Mar-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
06-Feb-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
09-Jan-2026
Evidence Of Prosecution
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
11-Dec-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
14-Nov-2025
Evidence Of Prosecution
Addi CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C
-
10-Oct-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
16-Sep-2025
Case filed
Registration No. 2688/2025
Case Summary: C.C.No.2688/2025 The court dismissed the civil case filed under Section 16 of the CPC, holding that the petitioner (Shalibhadra Finance Limited) failed to demonstrate grounds to proceed. The court ordered dismissal of the case and acquitted the respondent, while considering the respondent's financial circumstances in accordance with Supreme Court precedent regarding legal service authority involvement. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts