SA/77/2008 2/ 2 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SECOND APPEAL No. 77 of 2008 ========================================================= VINODKUMAR MOHANLAL PAGI - Appellant(s) Versus KAMLESHBHAI MOHANBHAI PAGI & 2 - Defendant(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MS SNEHA A JOSHI for Appellant(s) : 1, None for Defendant(s) : 1, 1.2.1, 1.2.2,1.2.3 - 3. ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI Date : 09/07/2008 ORAL ORDER
Admit.
The
following substantial questions of law arise in the appeal for
consideration:
[1] Whether
the lower appellate court erred in law in interpreting section 34 of
the Specific Relief Act, 1963 read with section 41(h) in its true
spirit and manner by holding that the appellant has not prayed a
consequential/substantial relief in his plaint and in absence of
consequence relief, no declaratory relief can be granted in favour
of the appellant?
[2] Whether
the lower appellate court below erred in considering the question
whether the suit is barred by the provisions of section 41(h) of the
Specific Relief Act?
[K.S.
JHAVERI, J.]
CIVIL
APPLICATION NO.3898 OF 2008
Rule
returnable on 6th August 2008. Ad interim relief in
terms of para 5(C).
[K.S.
JHAVERI, J.]
ar