State Bank of India Sarla Branch through manager Girishbhai Mayurbhai Chavda vs DAYABHAI VASHRAMBHAI GOHIL — 19/2026

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 7,2,9. Disposed: Uncontested--WITHDRAWN on 17th March 2026.

Case disposed

RCS - REGULAR CIVIL SUIT

CNR: GJSN060000832026

Filing Number

19/2026

Filing Date

19-Feb-2026

Registration No

19/2026

Registration Date

19-Feb-2026

Court

TALUKA COURT, MULI

Judge

27-Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

Decision Date

17-Mar-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--WITHDRAWN

Last updated 16-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 7,2,9
Specific Relief Act, 1963 Section 10
Contract Act, 1872 Section 10,50

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.State Bank of India Sarla Branch through manager Girishbhai Mayurbhai Chavda

    Adv. D M JOSHI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.DAYABHAI VASHRAMBHAI GOHIL

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 17-Mar-2026

    Order

    The court dismissed the case filed by State Bank of India against Dayabhai Vashrambhai Gohil after learning that the defendant had deceased, withdrawing the suit as the petitioner sought to proceed against the defendant's heirs instead. The court ordered the case be decided in accordance with the withdrawal application (Amendment 7) and directed issuance of a court fee refund certificate to the petitioner. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 17-Mar-2026

    Disposed

    Principal CIVIL Judge & J.M.F.C

  4. 19-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  5. 19-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 19/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The court dismissed the case filed by State Bank of India against Dayabhai Vashrambhai Gohil after learning that the defendant had deceased, withdrawing the suit as the petitioner sought to proceed against the defendant's heirs instead. The court ordered the case be decided in accordance with the withdrawal application (Amendment 7) and directed issuance of a court fee refund certificate to the petitioner. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

Search Another Case