Gujarat High Court High Court

Appearance : vs ========================================= on 13 May, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Appearance : vs ========================================= on 13 May, 2010
Author: Ravi R.Tripathi,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/6136/2010	 1/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 6136 of 2010
 

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


 

TAURENT
RENEWABLE ENERGY(P) LTD
 

Versus
 

KALPATARU
ALLOYS (P) LTD
 

=========================================
 
Appearance : 
MS
DHARMISHTA RAVAL with MS SNEHA A JOSHI
for the
Petitioner 
=========================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 13/05/2010 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

Heard learned
Advocate Ms.Raval with learned Advocate Ms.Shena Joshi for the
petitioner.

2. Learned
Advocate for the petitioner invited attention of the Court to various
Clauses of the MOU and an order passed by the Court below on
Misc.Civil Application No.36 of 2010 filed on 13.04.2010, of notice
returnable on 15.04.2010. In response to the notice, the respondent
herein appeared before the Court below and filed reply, wherein in
para-10(Z), page No.141 of this petition, it is specifically stated
that:-

(Z) …….

We never stopped them from entering into the plant but they
themselves stopped going into the plaint as they were failed to
produced the power. Even though we are ready to buy the powers from
the applicant if he is ready to supply the same as demanded by us as
I have repetitively saying in my reply

3. Learned
Advocate for the petitioner emphatically submitted that it is the
respondent herein who stopped the petitioner from going inside the
plant and securing safety of the goods belonging to the present
petitioner.

4. That being
so, let the petitioner make an application to the Court below for
appointment of Court Commissioner, who shall accompany the petitioner
/authorized person by the petitioner, to enter the premises. That
will make the things clear as to whether the respondents are stopping
the petitioner from entering the premises or not.

4.1 As and when
such application is made, the Court below is expected to pass an
urgent appropriate order in accordance with law.

5. In addition
to this, it will be open for the petitioner to file an appropriate
application seeking necessary directions from the Court below with
regard to safety of the goods belonging to the petitioner, kept in
the premises of the respondents.

6. In the
meantime, NOTICE returnable on 15.06.2010.

Liberty to
apply in case of difficulty.

Direct
service is permitted.

(Ravi
R.Tripathi, J.)

*Shitole

   

Top