Gujarat High Court High Court

State vs Ashwinkumardevjibhai on 13 July, 2010

Gujarat High Court
State vs Ashwinkumardevjibhai on 13 July, 2010
Author: Bhagwati Prasad,&Nbsp;Honourable S.R.Brahmbhatt,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CA/4264/2010	 1/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 4264 of 2010
 

In


 

LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 890 of 2010
 

In
 


SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 11245 of 2009
 

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


 

STATE
OF GUJARAT - Petitioner
 

Versus
 

ASHWINKUMARDEVJIBHAI
CHAUDHARY & 2 - Respondents
 

=================================================
 
Appearance : 
MS. MOXA
THAKKAR, LD. AGP for Petitioner: 
MR KG
PANDIT for Respondent : 1, 
RULE SERVED for Respondents : 2 -
3. 
================================================= 

 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD
		
	
	 
		 
			 

 

			
		
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
			 

 

			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE S.R.BRAHMBHATT
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 13/07/2010 

 

ORAL
ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD)

The
ad-interim relief is granted by the Division Bench against the order
passed by learned Single Judge. Learned counsel for the respondent
Mr. Pandit has argued this application for vacation of ad-interim
relief.

Shri
Pandit contended that the conduct of the appellant in not disclosing
the fact that the respondent herein above has already filed a
contempt proceeding which should weigh with the Court in deciding
the matter of interim relief. The conduct of the respondent in
obtaining ad-interim relief without disclosing the fact that they
are facing contempt proceedings is therefore relevant aspect and the
Court may not therefore grant interim relief or confirm the
ad-interim relief.

We
are unable to agree with the submissions of learned counsel Shri
Pandit as the pendency of contempt proceedings would no way be
considered as bar to challenge the order impugned, which is sought
to be implemented by way of contempt proceedings. The contempt
proceedings, therefore, shall not have any adverse impact upon the
present proceedings. We have also considered the law prevailing at
present and the resolution passed by the Government. We, therefore,
are of the view that the ad-interim relief granted vide order dated
3/5/2010 requires consideration. Accordingly, ad-interim relief is
confirmed to be interim relief. Civil application is disposed of.
Rule made absolute.

[
BHAGWATI PRASAD, J ]

[
S.R. BRAHMBHATT, J ]

/vgn

   

Top