Gujarat High Court High Court

Bharatbhai vs Becharbhai on 10 March, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Bharatbhai vs Becharbhai on 10 March, 2010
Author: K.M.Thaker,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CA/1734/2010	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 1734 of 2010
 

In


 

FIRST
APPEAL (STAMP NUMBER) No. 202 of 2009
 

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

 

BHARATBHAI
HIRABHAI PARIKH & 1 - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

BECHARBHAI
KARSHANBHAI JOGATIYA & 1 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
SHIRISH JOSHI for
Petitioner(s) : 1 - 2. 
DS AFF.NOT FILED (R) for Respondent(s) : 1
- 2. 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 10/03/2010 

 

ORAL
ORDER

Mr.

Becharbhai Karshanbhai Jogatiya is present in the Court. He made a
grievance that the copy of the Court’s notice/copy of the application
memo or appeal memo have not been served on him and have not been
received by him. He, however, has also submitted that his son i.e.
respondent No. 2 has received copy of the Court’s notice. The
affidavit of service and applicant’s version is contrary to what is
submitted by Mr. Becharbhai. In the affidavit of service it is stated
that the notice has been served on Becharbhai-respondent No. 1,
however respondent No. 2 (though was found present at Navsari address
when service of notice was offered), refused to accept the service.
Be that as it may. In view of the statement made by respondent No.
1-Becharbhai it appears that his son i.e. respondent No. 2 has
received the Court’s notice by post (forwarded by the applicant). So
far as respondent No. 1-Becharbhai is concerned he has been supplied
copy of the application and appeal memo which, he has received in the
Court. On inquiry he has stated that he wants to engage advocate to
oppose this proceeding.

Hence,
S.O. to 23.3.2010.

(K.M.THAKER,J.)

Suresh*

   

Top