Gujarat High Court High Court

Bhagwatbhai vs Babubhai on 23 April, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Bhagwatbhai vs Babubhai on 23 April, 2010
Author: Ravi R.Tripathi,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/4718/2010	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 4718 of 2010
 

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

BHAGWATBHAI
BABUBHAI PATEL - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

BABUBHAI
PARSHOTTAMBHAI PATEL & 2 - Respondent(s)
 

===================================== 
Appearance
: 
MR HARSHADRAY A DAVE for
Petitioner(s) : 1, 
None for Respondent(s) : 1 -
3. 
=====================================
 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI
		
	

 

Date
: 23/04/2010 

 

 
ORAL
ORDER

1.0 Heard
learned Advocate Mr. Dave for the petitioner. The learned advocate
for the petitioner invited attention of the Court to an important
fact that the parties are the family members and the dispute is about
the partnership business and the sharing of income arising from the
said business. He submitted that, an application exh. 5 was given
for injunction and application exh. 6 was given seeking appointment
of Receiver. Both these applications were rejected by the learned
trial Judge being 3rd Additional Civil Judge, Anand in
Regular Civil Suit No. 230 of 2008 on 24th December 2008.
Against that order two appeals were preferred, i) Misc. Civil Appeal
No. 6 of 2009 and ii) Misc. Civil Appeal No. 5 of 2009. The Misc.
Civil Appeal No. 5 of 2009 was allowed, whereas, Misc. Civil Appeal
No. 6 of 2009 was rejected and against that judgment and order dated
26th February 2010, the petitioner is before this Court.

2.0 The
learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that there are fair
chances of an amicable settlement in the matter in light of the fact
that the parties are family members. He submitted that in the
alternative, the petitioner will be praying for grant of relief to
the extent that the defendant be directed to render true and correct
accounts of the partnership business to the Court during the pendency
of the proceedings.

3.0 Notice
returnable on 3rd May 2010. Direct
service is permitted.

[
Ravi R. Tripathi, J. ]

hiren

   

Top