Shriram City Union Finance com.ltd vs Satish Rohidas Dere — 307/2023
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section O21R22. Disposed: Uncontested--DISMISSED on 06th March 2026.
Arbitration R.D
CNR: MHST200014452023
Filing Number
2254/2023
Filing Date
01-Sep-2023
Registration No
307/2023
Registration Date
01-Sep-2023
Court
Civil Court Senior Division, Wai
Judge
1-Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai
Decision Date
06-Mar-2026
Nature of Disposal
Uncontested--DISMISSED
Last updated 26-Mar-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Shriram City Union Finance com.ltd
Adv. Kshirsagar Ravindra T.
Respondent(s)
-
1.Satish Rohidas Dere
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
06-Mar-2026
Order on ExhibitView PDF
The Civil Judge, Wai dismissed arbitration application No. 307/2023 filed by Shiram City Finance against Satish for money recovery in default, as the decree holder company and its advocate remained absent and failed to pursue the case for over six years. The court found the decree holder reluctant to proceed and concluded that no purpose would be served by keeping the case pending. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
06-Mar-2026
Disposed
Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai
-
07-Jan-2026
Dismissal Order
Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai
-
11-Nov-2025
Dismissal Order
Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai
-
24-Sep-2025
Awaiting Notice
Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai
-
05-Jul-2025
Awaiting Notice
Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai
-
29-Mar-2025
Awaiting Notice
Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai
-
19-Dec-2024
Awaiting Notice
Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai
-
19-Sep-2024
Awaiting Notice
Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai
-
20-Jun-2024
Awaiting Notice
Civil Judge, Senior Division, Wai
-
29-Jan-2024
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
01-Sep-2023
Case filed
Registration No. 307/2023
The Civil Judge, Wai dismissed arbitration application No. 307/2023 filed by Shiram City Finance against Satish for money recovery in default, as the decree holder company and its advocate remained absent and failed to pursue the case for over six years. The court found the decree holder reluctant to proceed and concluded that no purpose would be served by keeping the case pending. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts