DIVYESHBHAI HIRABHAI CHANGELA DIRECTOR OF VISHAL BEARINGS vs PRATIKBHAI BIPINBHAI SHAH — 38/2024
Case under Specific Relief Act, 1963 Section 34. Disposed: Uncontested--EX-PARTE JUDGEMENT on 02nd May 2026.
RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT
CNR: GJRJ030007802024
Filing Number
38/2024
Filing Date
28-06-2024
Registration No
38/2024
Registration Date
28-06-2024
Court
TALUKA COURT, KOTDA SANGANI
Judge
1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Decision Date
02nd May 2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--EX-PARTE JUDGEMENT
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
DIVYESHBHAI HIRABHAI CHANGELA DIRECTOR OF VISHAL BEARINGS
Adv. R A SHUKLA
Respondent(s)
PRATIKBHAI BIPINBHAI SHAH
Hearing History
Judge: 1-PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE & J.M.F.C
Disposed
JUDGEMENT
FINAL ARGUMENTS
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 02-05-2026 | Disposed |
| 18-04-2026 | JUDGEMENT |
| 11-03-2026 | FINAL ARGUMENTS |
| 10-02-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE |
| 09-01-2026 | PLAINTIFF EVIDENCE |
Final Orders / Judgements
Summary The court partially allowed the plaintiff's insurance claim. The plaintiff, a limited company, sought recovery of Rs. 4,61,688 (including interest and expenses) from the defendant for fraudulently collected insurance premiums on six motor vehicles and unpaid glass replacement costs. The court ruled that the defendant must repay the fraudulently collected amount of Rs. 3,80,192 plus glass replacement cost of Rs. 81,496, with 6% annual interest, while holding the defendant liable for all case costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Summary The court partially allowed the plaintiff's insurance claim. The plaintiff, a limited company, sought recovery of Rs. 4,61,688 (including interest and expenses) from the defendant for fraudulently collected insurance premiums on six motor vehicles and unpaid glass replacement costs. The court ruled that the defendant must repay the fraudulently collected amount of Rs. 3,80,192 plus glass replacement cost of Rs. 81,496, with 6% annual interest, while holding the defendant liable for all case costs. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts