Gujarat High Court High Court

Anil vs Kamlaben on 11 November, 2008

Gujarat High Court
Anil vs Kamlaben on 11 November, 2008
Author: S.R.Brahmbhatt,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/771719/1988	 2/ 2	JUDGMENT 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 7717 of 1988
 

 
 
For
Approval and Signature:  
 
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE S.R.BRAHMBHATT
 
 
=================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

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 ?
		
	

 

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


 

ANIL
SYNTHETICS LTD - Petitioner
 

Versus
 

KAMLABEN
W/O HIMATSING JIVANSING - Respondent
 

=================================================
 
Appearance : 
MR
DG CHAUHAN for Petitioner: 
NOTICE UNSERVED for
Respondent: 
================================================= 

 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE S.R.BRAHMBHATT
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 11/11/2008 

 

 
 
ORAL
JUDGMENT

Heard
Shri Chauhan for the petitioner.

The
petitioner has assailed the order passed by the controlling
authority produced at Annexure-D, page-23 and the order passed by
the appellate authority dated 26/4/1988 produced at Annexure-E.

Shri
Chauhan has submitted that the order passed by the appellant
authority is based upon elaborate discussions and in view of this
finding the matter could not be stretched further. Shri Chauhan
could not argue the matter at length assailing the order. In view of
this and in view of the concurrent findings this Court is of the
view that the matter deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly
dismissed. However liberty is reserved to both the parties to
approach this Court in case of difficulty. Rule discharged.
Ad-interim relief granted earlier stands discharged. However no
order as to cost.

[
S.R. BRAHMBHATT, J ]

/vgn

   

Top