Special vs Joshi on 20 December, 2010

   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

FA/1374/2006	 2/ 2	JUDGMENT 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

FIRST
APPEAL No. 1374 of 2006
 

To


 

FIRST
APPEAL No. 1381 of 2006
 

 
For
Approval and Signature:  
 
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
 


 
=========================================================

 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

1
		
		 
			 

Whether
			Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
		
	

 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

2
		
		 
			 

To be
			referred to the Reporter or not ?
		
	

 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

3
		
		 
			 

Whether
			their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
		
	

 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

4
		
		 
			 

Whether
			this case involves a substantial question of law as to the
			interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order
			made thereunder ?
		
	

 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

5
		
		 
			 

Whether
			it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
		
	

 

 
=========================================================

 

SPECIAL
LAND AQUASITION OFFICER - Appellant(s)
 

Versus
 

JOSHI
SUNILKUMAR NAVINBHAI & 1 - Defendant(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR NEERAJ SONI AGP 
for
Appellant(s) : 1, 
None for Defendant(s) : 1, 
RULE SERVED for
Defendant(s) : 1.2.1,1.2.2  
MR JAY P AMIN for Defendant(s) :
1.2.1,1.2.2  
MR AD OZA for Defendant(s) :
2, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 07/12/2010 

 

 
ORAL
JUDGMENT

It
has been the consistent practice of this High Court not to enter into
the merits of those matters wherein the claim is upto Rs. 1,00,000/-
have been quantified by this Court as petty claims. In the captioned
appeals, the amount of claim are less than Rs. 1,00,000/-. Therefore
looking to the amount under challenge, the appeals stand dismissed.

It
is made clear that this order will not be treated as precedent.

(K.S.JHAVERI,
J.)

niru*

Top