State vs Patel on 23 November, 2010

   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CA/10328/2010	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CIVIL
APPLICATION - FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY No. 10328 of 2010
 

In
FIRST APPEAL (STAMP NUMBER) No. 2418 of 2009
 

To


 

CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 10334 of 2010 

 

In
FIRST APPEAL (STAMP NUMBER) No. 2424 of 2009
 

With


 

CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 10336 of 2010
 

In
FIRST APPEAL (STAMP NUMBER) No. 2426 of 2009
 

To


 

CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 10338 of 2010 

 

In
FIRST APPEAL (STAMP NUMBER) No. 2428 of 2009
 

With


 

CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 10340 of 2010
 

In
FIRST APPEAL (STAMP NUMBER) No. 2430 of 2009
 

To


 

CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 10341 of 2010 

 

In
FIRST APPEAL (STAMP NUMBER) No. 2431 of 2009
 

With


 

CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 10343 of 2010
 

In
FIRST APPEAL (STAMP NUMBER) No. 2433 of 2009
 

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

 

STATE
OF GUJARAT & 1 - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

PATEL
KIRTIKUMAR BHAGWANDAS - Respondent(s)
 

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

 

Appearance
: 
MR
KL PANDYA AGP for Petitioner(s) : 1 - 2. 
MR AMIT C NANAVATI for
Respondent(s) :
1, 
=========================================================



	 
		  
		 
		  
			 
				 

CORAM
				: 
				
			
			 
				 

HONOURABLE
				MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE
			
		
		 
			 
			 
				 

and
			
		
		 
			 
			 
				 

HONOURABLE
				MR.JUSTICE VIJAY MANOHAR SAHAI
			
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 23/11/2010 

 

 
 
COMMON
ORAL ORDER

(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE
A.L.DAVE)

These
applications are for condonation of delay of 106 days caused in
filing the Appeals.

2. Heard
learned AGP Mr KL Pandya for the applicant and learned advocate Mr
Amit C Nanavati for the opponent.

3. Considering
the contents of the application, it cannot be said that the delay
caused in filing the appeals has remained totally unexplained.
Therefore, we are of the view that the delay caused in filing the
appeals deserves to be condoned. Accordingly, the applications are
allowed. Delay is condoned. Rule is made absolute.

(A.L.

DAVE, J.)

(V.M.

SAHAI, J.)

zgs/-

Top