Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print LPA/2499/2009 2/ 2 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No. 2499 of 2009 In MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION No. 3279 of 2009 In SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 2505 of 2009 =============================================TORRENT POWER LIMITED - Appellant(s) Versus BVM MEDICAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH CHARITABLE TRUST & 1 - Respondent(s) ============================================= Appearance : MR KB PUJARA for Appellant(s) : 1, MRS KRISHNA G RAWAL for Respondent(s) : 1, MR PK JANI, GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent(s) : 2, RULE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 2, ============================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER Date : 10/08/2010 ORAL ORDER
: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA)
the writ petition preferred by the appellant, learned Single Judge
passed following interim order on 10.11.2009.
returnable on 23.12.2009. Mrs. Krishna Rawal, learned advocate
waives service of rule on behalf of respondent No.1
the meanwhile, the order of the appellate authority is not stayed.
But, it is clarified that the payment which are required to be
refunded to the petitioner will be adjusted in the running bill
and/or if the petitioner succeeds in the petition, then the
petitioner will pay the amount which is adjusted in the running bill
within a period of two months.
said order was further clarified by order dated 14.12.2009, wherein
in place of ‘petitioner’ as appearing at all places, it was ordered
to be read as ‘respondent’. It is against the above interim order,
present appeal has been preferred under Clause 15 of the Letters
30.12.2009, the appeal was admitted and ad-interim relief was granted
in terms of para 3(a) on condition that the appellant shall deposit
the amount ordered to be refunded to the respondent with this Court,
3(a) reads as follows:-
stay the operation of the impugned order dated 21.12.2009 passed by
the learned Single Judge (Coram: K.S. Jhaveri,J.) in MCA No.
3279/2009 in SCA No. 2505/2009 and to stay the operation of the
interim direction passed by the learned Single Judge directing
adjustment of the amount in the running bills, during the pendency
and final disposal of the LPA.
to the Court’s order, the appellant has deposited the amount with
this Court. In view of such order passed on 30.12.2009, which
continued for about 7 ? months, we are of the view that the
aforesaid interim order dated 30.12.2009 should be made absolute and
to continue till the writ petition preferred by the appellant is
disposed of. The order passed by the learned Single Judge stands
substituted by the interim order dated 30.12.2009 passed by this
Appeal and CA stands disposed of.