P.G.V.C.L.Dharangadhra vs JIGNESHBHAI DHARAMSHIBHAI KOLI — 129/2023

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 21,. Disposed: Uncontested--DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT on 10th March 2026.

EXE R - EXECUTION PETITION - REGULAR

CNR: GJSN080007342023

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

-

Filing Number

129/2023

Filing Date

12-04-2023

Registration No

129/2023

Registration Date

12-04-2023

Court

TALUKA COURT, DHRANGADHRA

Judge

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

Decision Date

10th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT

Acts & Sections

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 Section 21,

Petitioner(s)

P.G.V.C.L.Dharangadhra

Adv. H K VYAS

Respondent(s)

JIGNESHBHAI DHARAMSHIBHAI KOLI

Hearing History

Judge: 16-ADDL. SR. CIVIL JUDGE & A.C.J.M.

10-03-2026

Disposed

06-03-2026

WARRANT OF ATTACHMENT

10-02-2026

WARRANT OF ATTACHMENT

19-01-2026

WARRANT OF ATTACHMENT

29-11-2025

WARRANT OF ATTACHMENT

Final Orders / Judgements

10-03-2026
ORDER

The court directed all High Courts across India to collect data on pending execution petitions from their respective district courts and issue administrative orders mandating disposal within six months from filing, with presiding officers held accountable for non-compliance. The court reiterated the mandatory six-month completion timeline established in Rahul S. Shah case and emphasized that execution delays cannot be attributed solely to the appellant's absence—courts must provide valid legal reasons for any extensions beyond this period. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The court directed all High Courts across India to collect data on pending execution petitions from their respective district courts and issue administrative orders mandating disposal within six months from filing, with presiding officers held accountable for non-compliance. The court reiterated the mandatory six-month completion timeline established in Rahul S. Shah case and emphasized that execution delays cannot be attributed solely to the appellant's absence—courts must provide valid legal reasons for any extensions beyond this period. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

TALUKA COURT, DHRANGADHRA All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case