Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
FA/1260/2004 3/ 3 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
FIRST
APPEAL No. 1260 of 2004
With
FIRST
APPEAL No. 1261 of 2004
To
FIRST
APPEAL No. 1264 of 2004
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE R.M.CHHAYA
=========================================================
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 ?
=========================================================
AHMEDABAD
MUNICIPAL CORP. - Appellant(s)
Versus
ANILKUMAR
S KAPADIYA - Defendant(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR MAULIN R
RAVAL for
Appellant(s) : 1,
MR IA PATEL for Defendant(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE R.M.CHHAYA
Date
: 22/07/2011
ORAL
JUDGMENT
(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL)
As
in all the appeals, common question is to be considered, they are
being considered by this common order.
The
relevant facts are that the assessment of GRV made by the
Corporation against which the concerned respondent preferred appeal
before the learned Small Cause Judge. The learned Small Cause Judge
applied the criteria of 7% p.a. and has fixed the GRV of the
premises as referred in the impugned order for the respective year.
Under he circumstances, the present appeals.
The
learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as Mr.I.A.
Patel, appearing in First Appeal No.1260/04 submit that the issues
which arise for consideration were required to be considered by the
learned Small Cause Judge in light of the decision of this Court in
the case of Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation Vs. Dena Bank reported
at 2004(2) GLR 1117 and therefore, they submitted that the matter
may be remanded. It was also submitted that the learned Judge has
not recorded the detailed reasons casewise and has only filled up
the blanks by the draft order. The other respondents are served but
none appears on their behalf.
Considering
the facts and circumstances, it appears that the questions which
arise were required to be considered in light of the decision of
this Court in the case of Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation (supra)
but they have not been considered. Hence, all the impugned orders
are quashed and set aside with the direction that the concerned
appeal shall stand restored to the file and the learned Judge shall
decide the matter in light of the principles laid down by this Court
in the case of Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation (supra) and shall
render the decision as early as possible, preferably within a period
of one year from the receipt of the order of this Court.
Appeals
are allowed to the aforesaid extent. Considering the facts and
circumstances, no order as to costs.
(JAYANT
PATEL, J.)
(R.M.
CHHAYA, J.)
*bjoy
Top