Sri Rikab Chand S/O Late Motilal vs Dr S Subramanyam The Commissioner on 12 March, 2008

my sa: 1:  

:3 Tu: uxan anon: or unnnnmnxn as uananaoal
nmnn 'FE-11$ THE 12" um 03 TMJKRCH 2908

F338'?

ma mmamu 1m..:ua'r1c:n    

was new 11.: u.aunzci"§Av:._ 'V  

c. c.::. no. 651R2o ei  = "  

3E'}"!EKN:

an: arms csmzn

am LATE Mmxumu

REED -54 'rams    .

RJA FLA'? 320.401, '- _ 5 '

any FLOGP,   
FANG:-n9siiE;sj'a NE'_'AR?I'1'%w3¥l¥l'l'. "   
EBB €SKOS$_;;  '
BAN€§A£:(}RE¥'9--»._ »   .  

 -«e:§"G:9r£PLAIK£lRr

RED:

1

an s 
  ivaaxzm
  " .%   
EAhG;'i££3$1_Er~2"'v  V. 

 Balm"-«  u$'a5i:or«:3n<was'1':

_  srzmmmmmz mmmmm PALIICE
!'.i§*é'1AIwE-§I!'§E mag; emwtfimaan

,-_',,V _ 

 332:: 
  ma-1' mawmrn m-zsmzxa

 mwmsam mam

"  mm', aamssxnman

V9-EP 



MAJOR

um ms' mom T0 was ceupmxmw
Rm 249.2, arm cxoss
GANHHINAGAR _ _
aanxaamnn-9    3
 ACCUSED  --'-' '
{By 3353'. 1:: N ruwncswm son an 5. A3   L'

arr 2.1:. mwmn, mznr ran N!)

was on: IS FILED L§,fS.:1.1 ? &,  12'---ks?»-.__ 

cnmmxvr er comm' new ?"RP€Y-INS '~39 - .x«n11f*:~3'rz_
CDNTWPT PROCKEBHCIGS 56551435?  RE5F'€3i'§A'7}§E!€TS;  
nzsosnvmcs THE onnxn nT'::,z7.o4.._2a_c1=V-V% i%?éi'$£§J3 IN"

9:. P.:«:cs. 6581/0?' ( z.B--mp; .vxisz;  ANNm(URE« '---* 'A. 

ms eswrrorzfcaa~s1rséM:§u1%ir<$rc.oRnx:§s '-has my,
v.a.aaam|:ra:r an, raA1.m '3_'H.=: i13'£IyLLi'£,3ivifZ!ZA!bi£'£.,:_

Hash;  A   }:aunsa1 far the
comp3éifiéxt 3nfi§$&s§e§égn:Hfica.1 and 3 and 4.

  is filed czausplaining

di$f§§)R$€i§i&nCu§'A :the interim ardcr passed in

 i.I<:_:".'.L=V§Fa.1'?'«*%IV%:' l';--'._2t.'II:)'.f wherein an interim order was

 _ :;*_.;:1it§é'I'«._fsaé';$§t§i'ain;i.n«g resgondemt No.4 in tha writ

fifititgjfin. 3£Aac:c:uaed N<u..é in the C63') restraining

 xfraai. vvfixracting rm-thnr ccznastruction over the

 ?'*'?'<§;gaarty bearing Nt'§.3, 3" areas, Gandhinagar,

 jéfarcfi 1:v:o.2'?', Jaanqalmsa. It is coraplaiand that

though 3.911163 was sought; to be served upon

respanwent no.4, respondcnt no.4 raxused to

L§.,2a



as-nu

receive tau notice am notice was arxixed on the
wall at the building, which was being gut up and

phatagraphs at the same are produced.

3. Notice was issued to the respo;:H;3}¥ez.ité-t'~Ve.e::;S

reagmndent H-::.4§ has filed caunter  

23:: construction was put up" ~--e£tc§x' _§e§:%"»a'i'c:e} £1:

netica in the writ Petit3.¢n:"';anEAi_ "efia: '

at the fvurth resg¢nd§§§..,,1.,in Aizhg "':.§eeti"i%ion,"VL'

the writ petitian__ was Veisppeed «.:9An_fi56.7.2£307
giving liberty te'«-_z:i:hAe'A._L ezpegieizfient herein, the
writ petitioner  §eti{§,'ah, to make an

agplicatfi.-'§A:35'.'fE3;:w'. iaiVip1§edi'ng-"gin the suit pending
ce:nsi~;3crai9cie5'i1'':'j'-~** ; the civil Gaunt and
::aspanfi"er_:_t% _Né". intention ox' putting up

333% éavn3t.1*u£:t.ien. V

    the matter was posted on 3.3.2608,

hzfie'  Vcaunsel far the complainant had taken

tieta.  sin.-aducing the acknawledgament :3: copy of

 ntTh«gé :15-ti¢a intimating the stay order. Hwmmr,

 such acknawladqement or copy at ntstice is

"jxroduced and the averment made in the comlaint

that resgandent No.4 refused to receive the

netice is not substantiated by any material an

\»e--»"=e



'*1

record. Afrixturo on the Hall of building being
put up by raspcmdcant No.4 cannat be aaid tg--.___l::a an

valid sanrica, as substituted emrvica c-ai:--::.f'ks:§'--.,'4a

valid servica unly what: it is orciefiaci '-Ttfihsé

Court. In the ahsenca at _ajn:r__ mat§'£4ia:.i§';V. A.-Ishw" 

that the came: ream-aining :ji'e:-;§:}éiL:s.:iibi::1:

from araatinq furthers' at:-.;_::nst'::u<:'tiVon:' "i.."%.3»*..-!._§esrv§d 

upon mapezzdant bm.4, "V«.xgju1aVVsti'§3:2  digsoheying
than interim ardar' Jdcms mt
arise. Furthjax,   final cards:
passed in gin};-af.V VI'?arri:'&;  6.7.2004 that
1'10   izria violation at the
inta;',:?fi'.'r;_V   matter was finally
di5p§ 3a§I"   to the camplainant

hexqain t6"  aft. éfiplication ta implead himaaxf

 tigfi ~gLz:i.1:x. ""I'1't:'V is submitted by the learned

   'vgzhe cmuplainant that he has rilud an

"ag,;:3'[;_J1i»:: aii£i,';c:sV3!.ai'V;E=ar getting himself imploadad in tha

suit. §fLi§ging disobedience of the ordar on? status

" iq'%.:::J_ -gfanted by the Civil Caurt in the suit in

 '§.'.| fi§ !'l¢.3fi6f20OT. Further, though it 1:! aver:-ed in

"the umuplaint in para '3 that respondent rm.-t has

rafusaci 12:: receive the notice, than is he

material apart xram the said avarmant mud: in

LR}-

  4        - . W,_ mag;

85*

para ‘I to snow that respondent N<:.4 has refused
to racniva the natica and na documnnt is préflgcad

flaspita time granted on 3.3.2603.

5. undar tha circumstagcas, :w§.ihqi# *th§f* u

this is not 3 iit case for prec§é&in§,£u®tfia;=ifi

the matter by framing,cbarg€gfigain$%.;§§§afid§fifi ;

Nfl.4.

Insqfar as re§pqnu§fi%$ Z £§.3 af§H¢§ncerned,
thara is he dixactiQn.§#$§§h ig g3; interim order
dataa 1?.4.2fi§j. AA V ‘ _W V

Undfif :h§”fifififigifiigéufifitancas, we hold that
it is un§§c§§§&£y”fi§ fificcaafi further, as no pzima
facig. can? ig.¢§d§ but for framing charge.
Ac<:¢:d3.'ng_J_:&'= "c§.15gfi}.aint is dismissed. The

ra$§éndants"a§§ di§charged.

Sci/:3
Iudgré'

Sd/-~