Gujarat High Court High Court

Gujarat vs Vasudev on 6 April, 2011

Gujarat High Court
Gujarat vs Vasudev on 6 April, 2011
Author: Bankim.N.Mehta,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CA/14153/2010	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CIVIL
APPLICATION - FOR STAY No. 14153 of 2010
 

In


 

SECOND
APPEAL No. 242 of 2010
 

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

 

GUJARAT
WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPERS CORPORATION LTD - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

VASUDEV
MULSHANKAR JOSHI - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
R
C JANI & ASSOCIATE for
Petitioner(s) : 1, 
MR. S.P. MAJMUDAR for the
opponent 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 14/03/2011 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

Rule.

Learned advocate Mr. Majmudar waives service of notice for the
opponent.

With
the consent of the parties, this application is taken up for final
hearing.

Heard
learned advocates for the parties at length and in great detail.

The
applicant has sought stay of the judgement and order passed by the
trial Court and confirmed by the first appellate Court. It appears
that termination order of the applicant was set aside and the
opponent was found to be entitled for wages and other benefits as an
employee from 2.2.1985. It is not in dispute that the opponent has
reached the age of superannuation and is no longer in service of the
applicant. Therefore, there is no question of stay of the orders
passed by the Court below with regard to his employment. However, in
view of the fact that money decree is passed in favour of the
opponent with regard to wages and other benefits from 2.2.1985, the
decree being money decree, it cannot be stayed. Therefore, the
applicant is directed to deposit the decretal amount in the trial
Court within a period of four weeks from today and the opponent is at
liberty to withdraw the same on giving an undertaking before the
Court that he shall refund the same to the applicant in case the
applicant succeeds in Second Appeal No. 242 of 2010.

With
the above directions, the Civil Application stands disposed of. Rule
made absolute to the aforesaid extent.

(BANKIM N. MEHTA, J)

(pkn)

   

Top