SCA/7809/2008 1/ 3 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 7809 of 2008 ========================================================= TRIBHUVANBHAI NARANDAS PATEL - Petitioner(s) Versus TRIBHOVANBAUG CO OP HOUSING SOCIETY LTD & 6 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR MIHIR JOSHI, LD. SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH MR DIPAK R DAVE for Petitioner NOTICE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 1 - 6. MR N D NANAVATI, LD. SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH MR VIRAL K SHAH for Respondents: 1, 2 and 3. None for Respondent(s) : 7, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI Date : 04/05/2010 ORAL ORDER
Heard
Mr.Mihir Joshi, learned Senior Advocate with Mr.Dipak R Dave, for the
petitioner.
2. Matter
requires consideration.
3. RULE.
Mr.Viral K Shah, learned Advocate waives service of notice of rule on
behalf of respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3. So far as interim-relief is
concerned, it is a fact that, suit was filed being Regular Civil Suit
No.101 of 2006 on 01/04/2006 and Exh.5 application was also filed
alongwith the suit, but the said application Exh.5 was dismissed,
against that Civil Misc. Appeal No.44 of 2006 was filed and said
appeal was also came to be dismissed on 29/11/2006.
3.1 Thereafter,
another application praying for injunction being Exh.46 was filed on
03/03/2007 which came to be dismissed on 20/09/2007, against which
again Misc. Civil Appeal No.99 of 2007 was filed and that was
dismissed on 06/05/2008, against which the present petition is filed
and in this petition also there is no interim-relief granted till
date i.e. 04/05/2010.
4. Mr.N
D Nanavati, learned Senior Advocate for Mr.Viral K Shah, for
respondents No.1, 2 and 3 submitted that, if that is the position
then there is no question of grant of any injunction at this stage.
He further submitted that the record shows that the present
petitioner was not willing to go on with the hearing of the suit
which is pending at a stage of ‘chief examination’ as is set out in
affidavit in reply filed on behalf of respondents in Civil Misc.
Appeal No.99 of 2007, a copy of which is produced at Annexure M
(Page No.199), relevant part of which reads as under:
….
It is to be noted that the appellant is not willing to proceed with
the trial of the case though the issues are framed since more than
one year in the matter even though the case has been fixed for filing
affidavit for chief examination on the part of this appellant he is
avoiding the same by preferring false and frivolous applications so
as to keep the case alive and thereby harass the respondents 1-2-3 in
their development work of the suit property.
5. That
being so, this Court is of the opinion that it will be in the fitness
of things, if the Court below is directed to decide the Regular Civil
Suit No.101 of 2006 expeditiously and not beyond 30/10/2010. Order
accordingly. No interim-relief is granted at this stage.
(RAVI
R TRIPATHI, J.)
sompura