Gujarat High Court High Court

Union vs Sureshchandra on 25 January, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Union vs Sureshchandra on 25 January, 2010
Bench: S.R.Brahmbhatt
  
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	

 
 


	 

SA/99/2008	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SECOND
APPEAL No. 99 of 2008
 

With


 

CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 5970 of 2008
 

In
 


SECOND
APPEAL No. 99 of 2008
 

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


 

UNION
OF INDIA & 2 - Appellants
 

Versus
 

SURESHCHANDRA
KRUPASHANKAR PANDYA   Respondent 

 

=========================================================
Appearance : 
MR
BIPIN I MEHTA for
Appellants : 1 - 3. 
NOTICE SERVED for Respondent :
1, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE S.R.BRAHMBHATT
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 25/01/2010 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

Heard
Shri Mehta, learned advocate for the appellant. Though served, none
is present for the respondent.

In
this matter, on earlier occasion, on 27.11.2009, this Court (Coram:
Smt. Abhilasha Kumari, J.) passed the following order:-

The
endorsement on the board indicates that, though, notice has been
served upon the Respondent, none appears on his behalf. One more
opportunity may be given to the Respondent to make arrangements, to
defend the appeal.

List
on 17th December, 2009.

Thus,
it was ordered to be listed on 17.12.2009.

Today,
when the matter is called out, none is present for the respondent.

Looking
to the findings arrived at by the Courts below and the reasoning
adopted, this Appeal deserves consideration as it raises following
substantial question of law :-

Whether
person can be permitted to claim all advantages and rights as a
licensee when there is no valid licence agreement ever executed
granting him licence in respect of the stall?

Can
the person stranger to transaction be permitted to enjoy the rights
of licensee in absence of any other documentary evidence to prove
that he entitles for the said benefits?

Can
a stranger to the licensee be permitted to run the business without
license?

Would
the payment of license fees on behalf of licensee itself be
sufficient to permit the payer of the fees to enjoy the rights of
licensee?

Appeal
Admitted.

Order
in Civil Application No. : 5970 of 2008:-

By
way of interim relief, the order impugned shall remain stayed till
final disposal of the Second Appeal.

(S.R.BRAHMBHATT,
J.)

pallav