Gujarat High Court High Court

Gujarat vs Zala on 6 April, 2011

Gujarat High Court
Gujarat vs Zala on 6 April, 2011
Author: Ks Jhaveri,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/4253/2011	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 4253 of 2011
 

With


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 4254 of 2011
 

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


 

GUJARAT
STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION & 1 - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

ZALA
ISHVARSINH HAMIRSINH & 3 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance : 
MR
G.B. BAGHEL FOR MR HS MUNSHAW for
Petitioner(s) : 1 - 2. 
None for Respondent(s) : 1 -
4. 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 06/04/2011 

 

 
ORAL
ORDER

1. After
arguing the matters and when learned counsel for the petitioners
realized that this Court was not inclined to entertain both the
petitions, it was stated that the Court may not pass a reasoned order
in the matters and request has been made to issue appropriate
directions to the trial Court concerned to dispose of the suits in
question expeditiously.

2. In
view of the above statement made by learned counsel Mr. Baghel, this
Court is not recording any reasons on merits of the petitions.
However, it is observed that if the petitioners prefer an application
requesting the trial Court concerned to dispose of the suits
expeditiously, the trial Court concerned shall consider the same and
shall try to dispose of the suits as expeditiously as possible. While
deciding the suits in question, the trial Court shall not be
influenced by the observations made by it in its earlier order and
also by the order of the lower appellate Court and shall decide the
suit independently.

3. With
the above observations, both the petitions stand disposed of.

[K.

S. JHAVERI, J.]

Pravin/*

   

Top