Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/883/2010 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 883 of 2010
=========================================
MANSI
DEVELOPERS THROUGH ITS ADMINISTRATOR
Versus
JAMSHED
N GUZDAR & 15
=========================================
Appearance
:
MR DIPAK R DAVE for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
NOTICE UNSERVED for Respondent(s) : 1 - 2, 5,
7,
DELETED for Respondent(s) : 3, 6, 11,
MR RK MISHRA for
Respondent(s) : 4,
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 8, 14,
16,
MR SN BAROT for Respondent(s) : 9 - 10,12 - 13, 15,
MR CB
UPADHYAYA for Respondent(s) :
16,
=========================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER
Date
: 02/12/2010
ORDER
ON THE NOTE (SPEAKING TOMINUTES) DATED 30.09.2010
1. By
the aforesaid note, original petitioner has submitted that though on
17.09.2010, two writ petitions namely Special Civil Application
Nos.883 of 2010 and 2447 of 2009 were listed for hearing, it is only
the writ petition being Special Civil Application NO.883 of 2010
which was disposed of by the order dated 17.09.2010 whereas Special
Civil Application No.2447 of 2009 and Civil Application No.3021 of
2010 in Special Civil Application No.2447 of 2009 were ordered to be
adjourned. However, the cause title of the order dated 17.09.2010 an
inadvertent error has occurred as a result of which the record of the
Court shows that Special Civil Application No.2447 of 2009 and Civil
Application No.3021 of 2010 are also disposed of and that therefore,
the said order dated 17.09.2010 is required to be appropriately
modified or clarified.
2. Upon
examination of order dated 17.09.2010, it is noticed that in
paragraph Nos.9 and 10 of the order dated 17.09.2010, it is stated
thus;
“9. With
the aforesaid clarification the petitions are disposed of. The
interim relief, if any, stands vacated.
10. In
view of the order passed in main matter the civil application stand
disposed of.”
3. On
the other hand, the cause title of the order makes a reference of
both writ petitions i.e. Special Civil Application No.883 of 2010 and
Special
Civil Application No.2447 of 2009 and Civil Application No.3021 of
2010 in Special Civil Application No.2447 of 2009.
4. Therefore,
in view of the observations in paragraph Nos.9 and 10 of the order,
the Registry appears have construed that Special Civil Application
No.2447 of 2009 and Civil Application No.3031 of 2010 are also
disposed of.
5. Mr.D.
R. Dave, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner has submitted
that actually, only Special Civil Application No.883 of 2010 was
disposed of.
6. Mr.R.
K. Mishra, learned advocate appearing for respondent has supported
the submissions of the learned advocate for the petitioner.
7. Thus,
having regard to the submissions made by Mr.D. R. Dave, learned
advocate for the petitioner which are supported by learned advocate
for the respondent, the order dated 17.09.2010 is ordered to be
modified so as to clarify that by the said order, only Special Civil
Application No.883 of 2010 stands disposed of whereas Special Civil
Application No.2447 of 2009 and Civil Application No.3021 of 2010 in
Special Civil Application No.2447 of 2009 are not disposed of and
they remain pending at the stage at which same were as on 17.09.2010.
Office is, therefore, directed to restore the said two cases i.e.
Special Civil application No.2447 of 2009 and Civil Application
No.3021 of 2010 on its original file, if they are shown as disposed
of on the record.
8. Paragraph
Nos.9 and 10 of the order dated 17.09.2010 shall be corrected so as
to mention that Special Civil Application No.883 of 2010 is disposed
of.
9. Orders
on the note accordingly. The note stands disposed of.
[
K. M. THAKER, J. ]
vijay
Top