Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CA/4466/2011 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CIVIL
APPLICATION - FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY No. 4466 of 2011
with
LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 552 of 2011
In
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 15089 of 2010
with
CIVIL
APPLICATION NO.5309 OF
2011
=================================================
KHEDA
DISTRICT CENTRAL CO OP BANK - Petitioner(s)
Versus
BALASINOR
CO OP COTTON CELL GINNING & PRESSING SOCIETY LTD - Respondent(s)
=================================================
Appearance
:
MR
SAURABH G AMIN for Petitioner(s) : 1,
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for
Respondent(s) : 1,
MR BS PATEL for Respondent(s) :
1,
=================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA
Date
: 29/04/2011
ORAL
ORDER
(Per
: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA)
ORDER
IN CA NO.4466/2011:
This
application is filed for condonation of delay of 51 days in
preferring the appeal against the order dated 13th December 2010
passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.
15089 of 2010. The petitioner has given details as to when he
applied for the certified copy (14th December 2010) which was
delivered to the counsel on 21st January 2010. Thereafter, some time
was taken by the lawyer to prefer the appeal.
Having
heard learned counsel for the parties, and being satisfied with the
explanation given, delay of 51 days in preferring the appeal is
condoned. Civil Application stands disposed of.
ORDER
IN LPA NO.552/2011 & CA NO.5309/2011:
Heard
learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. Umang Oza, counsel
appearing for the respondent. From the impugned order dated 13th
December 2010 it will be evident that the impugned order is a
non-speaking order passed by the learned Single Judge, which reads as
follows:-
“1.0 Heard
learned advocate Mr. Saurabh G. Amin for the petitioner. The learned
advocate for the petitioner states that, before reaching to the stage
of High Court, an amount of Rs.31,450/- is spent towards legal
services, whereas, an amount of Rs.20,000/- is spent for the legal
services at the High Court.
2.0 The
order passed by the Tribunal is of discretionary in nature and this
Court deems it proper not to interfere with the same. Hence, the
petition is dismissed.”
For
the reasons aforesaid, we set aside the order dated 13th December
2010 and remit the case, Special Civil Application No. 15089 of 2010
to the learned Single Judge for decision on merit. The Letters
Patent Appeal and Civil Application both stand disposed of.
(S.J.
MUKHOPADHAYA, C.J.)
(J.B.
PARDIWALA, J.)
[sn
devu] pps
Top