Gujarat High Court High Court

Hind vs Shree on 4 July, 2008

Gujarat High Court
Hind vs Shree on 4 July, 2008
Bench: Bankim.N.Mehta
  
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	

 
 


	 

CS/1/2007	 3/ 3	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CIVIL
SUITS No. 1 of 2007
 

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

 

HIND
MOSAIC AND CEMENT WORKS & 1 - Plaintiff(s)
 

Versus
 

SHREE
SAHJANAND TRADING CORPORATION & 1 - Defendant(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
KAMAL B. TRIVEDI, SENIOR COUNSEL appearing with  MR.H.S.TOLIA,
MR.TEJAS TRIVEDI,Learned advocates for MR
YJ TRIVEDI for
the Plaintiff(s) : 1 - 2. 
None for Defendant(s) : 1, 
MR PRANAV
S TRIVEDI for Defendant(s) :
2, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 04/07/2008 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

1. Though
learned advocate Mr.Y.J.Trivedi appearing for the plaintiffs has
filed sick note, learned senior counsel Mr.Kamal B. Trivedi with
learned advocate Mr.H.S.Tolia and learned advocate Mr.Tejas S.
Trivedi appears for him.

2. Defendant
No.1 though served, none appears. Learned advocate Mr.Pranav S.
Trivedi appears for contesting defendant No.2.

3. In
furtherance of this Court’s earlier orders dated 27.3.2008 and
22.4.2008, both the parties to the proceedings agree for appointment
of Shri P.B.Raval, Retired Judge of City Civil Court, Ahmedabad, as
Court Commissioner, whose consent has been obtained, to record oral
evidence to be placed before this Court. In view of consensus between
the parties in this behalf, the following directions are issued in
the matter-

(i) Shri
P.B.Raval, Retired Judge of City Civil Court, Ahmedabad is appointed
as a Court Commissioner to record oral evidence of both the parties;

(ii) The
terms and conditions of the said appointment may be mutually fixed by
the parties in consultation with Shri P.B.Raval;

(iii)The
venue for the aforesaid purpose shall be decided in consultation with
Shri P.B.Raval;

(iv) Both
the parties have already filed their examination-in-chief by way of
affidavits therefore their cross-examination will be recorded by the
Court Commissioner and in case of need, both the parties are at
liberty to lead further evidence.

(v) The
recording of oral evidence shall be over within two months from today
and the parties shall extend all co-operation to the Court
Commissioner in completing the recording of evidence within this
time.

(vi) Since
the defendants have challenged the validity of the plaintiffs’
subsisting registered patent by filing the counter-claim for its
revocation,the defendants shall begin first and the plaintiffs
reserve their right to lead evidence in rebuttal.

4. In
view of above, Registry is directed to handover the record and
proceedings to the Court Commissioner Shri P.B.Raval, Retired Judge
of City Civil Court, Ahmedabad for the purpose of recording evidence
in the suit. The Court Commissioner is directed to report to this
Court with the evidence recorded by him on or before 1.9.08 with
record and proceedings. The suit stands over to 10th
September, 2008.

(Bankim
N. Mehta, J.)

sudhir