Ahmedabad vs Tarlikaben on 3 August, 2011

  
 Gujarat High Court Case Information System 
    
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

FA/95/1997	 2/ 2	JUDGMENT 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

FIRST
APPEAL No. 95 of 1997
 

With


 

FIRST
APPEAL No. 97 of 1997
 

With


 

FIRST
APPEAL No. 96 of 1997
 

 
 
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 CORPORATION - Appellant(s)
 

Versus
 

TARLIKABEN
BHUPENDRABHAI SHAH - Defendant(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
BHASKAR P. TANNA, LD. SR. COUNSEL ASSISTED BY MR.BH BHATT FOR TANNA
ASSOCIATES for
Appellant(s) : 1, 
MS SUDHA R GANGWAR for Defendant(s) :
1, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE R.M.CHHAYA
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 03/08/2011 

 

 
 
ORAL
JUDGMENT

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL)

when
all the appeals are taken up for final hearing, the learned Counsel
for the respondent Ms.Sudha Gangwar declared before the Court that
as per the instructions received by her, the taxation liability is
already settled with the Corporation, which is the subject matter of
the present appeals and thereafter, her client has already
transferred the property to another person.

Mr.Tanna,
learned Sr. Counsel has no instruction in this regard.

In
above view of the matter, the cause for the appeals against the
decision would not survive. Hence, all the appeals shall stand
disposed of as having become infructuous.

(Jayant Patel, J.)

(R. M. Chhaya, J.)

vinod

Top