Gujarat High Court High Court

Rajula vs Arvindbhai on 9 July, 2008

Gujarat High Court
Rajula vs Arvindbhai on 9 July, 2008
Bench: A.L.Dave And Kumari, Abhilasha Kumari
  
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	

 
 


	 

LPA/578/2008	 2/ 3	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 578 of 2008
 

in


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 17237 of 2007
 

with
 

CIVIL
APPLICATION No.6311 of 2008 
 


 

 


 

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


 

RAJULA
NAGARPALIKA - Appellant(s)
 

Versus
 

ARVINDBHAI
RAVJIBHAI & 6 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
Appearance : 
MR
RV DESAI for Appellant 
None
for Respondent(s) : 1 -
7. 
=========================================================


 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

HON'BLE
			SMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA KUMARI
		
	

 

 
 


 

 
 


 

Date
: 09/07/2008 

 

 
ORAL
ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE)

The
appellant ý Rajula Nagarpalika challenges the order of the learned
Single Judge dated 16th January, 2008, passed in Special
Civil Application No.17237 of 2007 only to the extent where the
learned Single Judge has awarded cost of Rs.10,000/- to each of the
respondents.

The
main ground on which the Appeal is preferred is that the appellant is
facing financial crises.

We
have heard learned advocate Mr.R.V.Desai. Apart from his peripheral
arguments, his main argument relating to the Appeal is that the
appellant is facing financial crises and that the respondents-workmen
were represented by Union. Except that the quantum is on higher side,
learned advocate Mr.Desai is unable to point out any element of
arbitrariness in the order of the learned Single Judge awarding
costs.

A
plain reading of the order impugned makes it clear that the learned
Single Judge was inclined to award costs and quantified it at
Rs.10,000/- for each workman keeping in mind that it was the third
round of litigation that the workmen were required to face. In our
opinion, the amount of costs awarded by the learned Single Judge
cannot be in any manner considered to be either arbitrary or on
higher side.

So
far as poor financial condition of the appellant is concerned, that
part seems to have been taken care of by the learned Single Judge
when he says that the amount may be paid even by instalments. Under
the circumstances, the award of costs being an order to the
discretion of the Court, and no arbitrariness having been found, this
Court, as an appellate Court, would not interfere with the same.

The
Appeal, therefore, must fail. It is, accordingly, dismissed.

In
the light of dismissal of Appeal, Civil Application stands disposed
of .

(A.L.Dave,
J.)

(Smt.Abhilasha
Kumari, J.)

(sunil)