Gujarat High Court High Court

Ankit vs Pelican on 22 February, 2011

Gujarat High Court
Ankit vs Pelican on 22 February, 2011
Author: Ks Jhaveri,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

AO/296/2010	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

APPEAL
FROM ORDER No. 296 of 2010
 

With


 

CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 10636 of 2010
 

In
APPEAL FROM ORDER No. 296 of 2010
 

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

 

ANKIT
PHARMACEUTICALS - Appellant(s)
 

Versus
 

PELICAN
PHARMACHEM PVT LTD - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
YJ TRIVEDI for
Appellant(s) : 1, 
NOTICE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 1, 
MR KAPIL
K ACHARYA for Respondent(s) :
1, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 22/02/2011
 

COMMON
ORAL ORDER

By
way of present Appeal From Order, the appellant has inter alia
prayed for quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 13th
April 2010 passed by the Chamber Judge, City Civil Court, Ahmedabad,
below Exhibit 6/7 in Regular Civil Suit No.2136 of 2009.

Having
considered the contentions raised by the learned advocate for the
appellant, contentions raised in the appeal from order and on
perusal of the impugned order and with consent of the learned
advocate for the appellant, it is hereby ordered that if an
application is moved by the appellant before the trial Court for
expediting the suit proceedings, the trial Court will consider the
same and will dispose of the suit proceedings as expeditiously as
possible. The Appeal From Order stands disposed of
accordingly. Notice is discharged with no order as to
costs. Consequently, the Civil Application for stay stands disposed
of.

It
is clarified that the observations made by the trial Court while
passing the impugned order are tentative in nature and, therefore,
the same will not come in the way of the appellant while deciding
the suit. It is also clarified that this Court has not expressed any
opinion on merits of the matter.

It
is also clarified that if an application is moved by the learned
advocate for the appellant for recording of evidence by the Court
Commissioner, the trial Court will consider such application after
hearing both the sides.

(K.S.

Jhaveri, J)

Aakar

   

Top