Gujarat High Court High Court

Srinagar vs Surat on 28 March, 2011

Gujarat High Court
Srinagar vs Surat on 28 March, 2011
Author: Rajesh H.Shukla,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SA/99/1997	 2/ 2	JUDGMENT 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SECOND
APPEAL No. 99 of 1997
 

With


 

SECOND
APPEAL No. 100 of 1997
 

 
For
Approval and Signature:  
 
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE RAJESH H.SHUKLA		:	Sd/-
 
 
=======================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

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 ?
		
	

 

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


 

SRINAGAR
CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LIMITED - Appellant(s)
 

Versus
 

SURAT
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & 2 - Defendant(s)
 

=======================================================
Appearance : 
MR
CH VORA for Appellant(s) : 1, 
MR PRASHANT G DESAI for Defendant(s)
: 1, 
None for Defendant(s) : 2, 2.2.1, 2.2.2,
2.2.3,2.2.4-3. 
=======================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE RAJESH H.SHUKLA
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 28/03/2011
 

ORAL
JUDGMENT

Learned
counsel Mr.C.H. Vora for the appellant states that he has received
telephonic instruction that the respondent-Surat Municipal
Corporation has taken over the possession and both these matters have
become infructuous.

Accordingly,
both these Second Appeals stand disposed of as having become
infructuous.

Sd/-

(RAJESH
H.SHUKLA, J.)

/patil

   

Top