Gujarat High Court High Court

Navmeet vs Senior on 1 October, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Navmeet vs Senior on 1 October, 2010
Author: D.H.Waghela,&Nbsp;Honble Smt. Kumari,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/12866/2010	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 12866 of 2010
 

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


 

NAVMEET
CARGO PVT LTD THROUGH DIRECTOR MUKESH B KOTHARI - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

SENIOR
DIVISIONAL COMMERCIAL MANAGER (D.R.M) & 1 - Respondents
 

=========================================
 
Appearance : 
MR
AB VYAS for
Petitioner(s) : 1,MS.P J.JOSHI for Petitioner(s) : 1, 
None for
Respondent(s) : 1 - 2. 
=========================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

HON'BLE
			SMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA KUMARI
		
	

 

Date
: 01/10/2010 

 

 
ORAL
ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA)

The
petitioner has been awarded contract by way of leasing out four
tones of space in train no. 171 running between Ahmedabad and
Jodhpur, and that lease period, expressly restricted and agreed upon,
is expiring in November,2010. The petitioner is stated to have made
representations and applications before the higher authorities which
are stated to be under consideration. However, in the meantime,
without participating in any fresh tendering process, the petitioner
has prayed herein for a direction to the respondent to issue tender
notice afresh after disposal of the disputes raised by the petitioner
in their applications and representations. Learned counsel for the
petitioner completely failed in substantiating the first and main
contention that the original term of the lease of the petitioner was
for three years. Instead, it is made abundantly clear by the
respondents in their letter dated 09.11.2009 that the period of lease
was limited to one year.

Thus,
no ground having been made out for grant of any relief or
entertaining the petition, it is summarily dismissed.

[D.H.WAGHELA,
J.]

[ABHILASHA
KUMARI, J.]

JYOTI

   

Top