Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CA/12547/2007 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CIVIL
APPLICATION - FOR JOINING PARTY No. 12547 of 2007
In
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 8654 of 1998
=========================================================
PATNI
MANILAL KHODIDAS - Petitioner(s)
Versus
ELECTRIC
CONTROL GEAR (INDIA) LTD. - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
TR MISHRA for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
MR KM PATEL for Respondent(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER
Date
: 23/06/2010
ORAL
ORDER
Mr.
Mishra learned advocate for the applicant initially prayed for
permission to amend the present application, however, in view of the
statement by Mr. Patel learned advocate for the opponent company that
there has been further change in the name of the opponent company and
that therefore the relief prayed for in the present application has
become redundant and infructuous, subsequently he submitted that if
the applicant is permitted to submit fresh application then the
applicant would withdraw present application and file fresh
application seeking necessary amendment in the petition and affidavit
may be dispensed with. He also submitted that since the fresh
amendment will have to be prayed for in view and on the basis of the
statement made by advocate of the opponent company, the request for
dispensing with the affidavit is justified.
Having
regard to the submissions of the learned Counsel of the applicant,
the permission to withdraw the application with liberty to file
fresh application in view of the statement made by the advocate of
the opponent company, is granted. It will be permissible to the
applicant to file fresh application seeking amendment in the cause
title of the petition so as to change the name of the opponent
company.
In
view of the fact that the amendment will have to be carried out in
light of the information given by the opponent’s advocate, the
affidavit in support of the application for the aforesaid limited
purpose is dispensed with. It is, however, clarified that if and when
such application is filed it will be heard and decided after
considering the objection of the other side on all grounds and the
permission to amend will ipso facto not create any right to claim
relief against such newly added opponent and the relief against such
opponent shall be considered on its own merit.
The
request of the learned advocate for the opponent is justified.
With
the aforesaid clarification the applicant is permitted to withdraw
the application with a liberty to file fresh application.
(K.M.THAKER,J.)
Suresh*
Top