Gujarat High Court High Court

United vs Kanubhai on 6 April, 2010

Gujarat High Court
United vs Kanubhai on 6 April, 2010
Author: K.M.Thaker,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

FA/557/2002	 1/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

FIRST
APPEAL No. 557 of 2002
 

With
 

CIVIL
APPLICATION No.2137 of 2002
 

In
 

FIRST
APPEAL No. 557 of 2002
 

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

 

UNITED
INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD. - Appellant(s)
 

Versus
 

KANUBHAI
ASHABHAI VALAND & 2 - Defendant(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
(MR
PV NANAVATI) for
Appellant(s) : 1,MR VIBHUTI NANAVATI for Appellant(s) : 1, 
MR
NALIN K THAKKER for Defendant(s) : 1, 
NOTICE UNSERVED for
Defendant(s) : 2, 
NOTICE SERVED for Defendant(s) : 3, 
SERVED BY
RPAD - (N) for Defendant(s) :
3, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 06/04/2010 

 

 
ORAL
ORDER

Mr.Nanavati,
learned advocate for the appellant, submitted that respondent No.2,
the driver, as reported, has expired. He has also submitted that even
during the trial, he did not appear as witness.

He
further submitted that in view of the facts and circumstances, the
said respondent No.2 would not be affected in any manner, if the
decree is confirmed as it is or even if it is modified. He,
therefore, sought leave to delete respondent No.2.

Permission,
as prayed for, is granted. Respondent No.2 is directed to be
deleted. The appellant shall carry out necessary amendment in the
cause title of the appeal and the application within three days from
today.

Though,
by order dated 29.03.2010, the Registry was directed to list the
appeal for final hearing in the week beginning from 3rd
May, 2010, today, Mr.Thakker, learned advocate for opponent No.1 i.e.
the claimant, has submitted that in view of the contentions taken in
the appeal, he would take instructions from his client and ascertain
as to whether the claimant is satisfied with the decreetal amount and
if that be so, the appeal may kindly be put to an end at an earlier
date.

Considering
the said request, the office is directed to place the matter for
hearing in admission board on 15.04.2010.

(K.M.Thaker,
J.)

rakesh/

   

Top