Gujarat High Court High Court

Patel vs Gothva on 13 December, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Patel vs Gothva on 13 December, 2010
Author: Ravi R.Tripathi,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/14719/2010	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 14719 of 2010
 

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

PATEL
JAYESHBHAI DAHYABHAI - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

GOTHVA
GRAM PANCHAYAT THRO' SARPANCH & 3 - Respondent(s)
 

===================================== 
Appearance
: 
MR JIGAR G GADHAVI for
Petitioner(s) : 1, 
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 1 -
4. 
MR SI NANAVATI, SENIOR ADVOCATE with MS ANUJA S NANAVATI for
Respondent(s) : 1, 
GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent(s) : 3, 
MR
HS MUNSHAW for Respondent(s) :
4, 
=====================================
 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI
		
	

 

Date
: 13/12/2010 

 

 
ORAL
ORDER

1.0 Learned
advocate Mr. Gadhavi for the petitioner moves the draft amendment.
The same is allowed.

2.0 Heard
learned senior advocate Mr. SI Nanavati with Ms. Anuja Nanavati for
respondent no. 1. The learned senior advocate has filed Action Taken
Report and invited attention of the Court to Item No. 2 pertaining to
Patel Dineshbhai Bhudarbhai. It is stated that the demolition work
is, for the present, not carried further, as demolishing the RCC Slab
is going to seriously damage the construction, which is otherwise
legal and is required to be retained.

3.0 The
learned senior advocate, on instructions from the Deputy Sarpanch,
who is present in the Court, states that Patel Dineshbhai Bhudarbhai
had promised the Deputy Sarpanch that he will appear before the Court
today but after promising, he has chosen not to appear before the
Court and therefore, Panchayat will undertake the exercise of putting
up column/pillar to reinforce the retainable structure and will
recover the expenses for the same from the party concerned. He
requests that he be granted at least 10 days’ time to see that the
aforesaid exercise is completed and with that the remaining work of
removing unauthorized construction is completed. So far as the
construction of Shri Patel Govindbhai Shankarbhai is concerned, the
work is already completed.

4.0 The
matter is kept on 27th December 2010.

[
Ravi R. Tripathi, J. ]

hiren

   

Top