{"id":118336,"date":"2010-03-08T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2010-03-07T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shree-vs-ahmedabad-on-8-march-2010"},"modified":"2017-10-03T13:46:05","modified_gmt":"2017-10-03T08:16:05","slug":"shree-vs-ahmedabad-on-8-march-2010","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shree-vs-ahmedabad-on-8-march-2010","title":{"rendered":"Shree vs Ahmedabad on 8 March, 2010"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Shree vs Ahmedabad on 8 March, 2010<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: K.A.Puj,&amp;Nbsp;<\/div>\n<pre>   Gujarat High Court Case Information System \n\n  \n  \n    \n\n \n \n    \t      \n         \n\t    \n\t\t   Print\n\t\t\t\t          \n\n  \n\n\n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t \n\t\n\n\n \n\n\n\t \n\nSCA\/2984\/2010\t 1\/ 8\tORDER \n \n \n\n\t\n\n \n\nIN\nTHE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD\n \n\n \n\n\n \n\nSPECIAL\nCIVIL APPLICATION No. 2984 of 2010\n \n\n=======================================================\n\n\n \n\nSHREE\nGITA WOOD WORKS &amp; SAW MILL - Petitioner(s)\n \n\nVersus\n \n\nAHMEDABAD\nEDUCATION SOCIETY &amp; 7 - Respondent(s)\n \n\n=======================================================\nAppearance : \nMR\nMB GANDHI for Petitioner(s) : 1,                    MR CHINMAY M\nGANDHI for Petitioner(s) : 1, \nMR SN SOPARKAR with MR MERCHANT for\nRespondent(s):\n1-8. \n======================================================= \n\n \n\t  \n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nCORAM\n\t\t\t: \n\t\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t \n\t\t\t \n\nHONOURABLE\n\t\t\tMR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ\n\t\t\n\t\n\n \n\nDate\n: 08\/03\/2010\n \n\nORAL\nORDER<\/pre>\n<p>Leave<br \/>\n\tto amend the prayer clause by challenging the order at Annexure-A<br \/>\n\tand leave to produce the xerox copy of the partnership deed, wherein<br \/>\n\tthe petitioner is shown as one of the partners of the partnership<br \/>\n\tfirm of Shree Gita Wood Works &amp; Saw Mill.\n<\/p>\n<p>The<br \/>\n\tpetitioner has filed this petition under Article 226 of the<br \/>\n\tConstitution of India seeking declaration from this Court that the<br \/>\n\telectoral roll prepared and published by the respondent no.1-trust<br \/>\n\tis absolutely illegal one and in turn the election which is to be<br \/>\n\theld on 10.03.2010 be also directed to be stayed till the correct<br \/>\n\telectoral roll is prepared and till the electoral roll in which the<br \/>\n\tobjections are properly and legally decided. By way of oral request,<br \/>\n\tthe petitioner has also challenged the impugned order at Annexure-A<br \/>\n\tpassed by the Charity Commissioner.\n<\/p>\n<p>Heard<br \/>\n\tMr.M.B. Gandhi, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner and<br \/>\n\tMr.S.N. Soparkar, Learned Senior Counsel with Mr.Merchant, learned<br \/>\n\tadvocate appearing for the respondents after a copy is being served<br \/>\n\ton them as per the oral direction of this Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>Before<br \/>\n\tfiling the present petition, the petitioner has moved an application<br \/>\n\tbefore the Charity Commissioner, which after hearing the parties,<br \/>\n\twas rejected by an order dated 10.02.2010. Mr.Gandhi submitted that<br \/>\n\tall issues which are raised by the petitioner before the Charity<br \/>\n\tCommissioner, were not properly considered. He has further submitted<br \/>\n\tthat several objections were raised, however, same were not<br \/>\n\tappreciated by the Charity Commissioner. The correctness of the<br \/>\n\telectoral roll is also not examined by the Charity Commissioner<br \/>\n\tdispite the fact that specific instances were pointed out. Mr.Gandhi<br \/>\n\tfurther submitted that though all the documents with regard to the<br \/>\n\tpetitioner are on record, the petitioner&#8217;s name was wrongly deleted<br \/>\n\tfrom the electoral roll and thereby the petitioner was deprived from<br \/>\n\tcasting his vote in the election, which is said to be held on 10th<br \/>\n\tMarch, 2010.\n<\/p>\n<p>Mr.Gandhi<br \/>\n\thas also referred to earlier proceedings and submitted that since no<br \/>\n\telections were held, raising various issues and for better and<br \/>\n\tproper management of the trust, the present petitioner and other had<br \/>\n\tfiled Misc. Application Nos.35\/2005, 52\/2005 &amp; 55\/2005 before<br \/>\n\tthe Charity Commissioner. The said applications were allowed and the<br \/>\n\tdirections were issued by the Charity Commissioner vide order dated<br \/>\n\t28.04.2006. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied therewith, the<br \/>\n\trespondent no.1-Trust preferred three Special Civil Applications<br \/>\n\tbefore this Court namely  Special Civil Application Nos.10722\/2006,<br \/>\n\t10723\/2006 &amp; 10725\/2006, wherein the orders passed by the<br \/>\n\tCharity Commissioner were upheld. As per the order of the Charity<br \/>\n\tCommissioner, the Assistant Charity Commissioner was appointed to<br \/>\n\tmanage the election process. Instead of that by consent, an<br \/>\n\tamendment was made by the High Court and certain directions were<br \/>\n\tissued. Thereafter, one Misc. Application was filed, in which, issue<br \/>\n\tarose about the scrutiny of 935 objections, which the society had<br \/>\n\treceived and in the said application, the Court gave direction for<br \/>\n\tscrutinizing the same. Mr.Gandhi further submitted that even<br \/>\n\tthereafter the respondent-Trust did not do anything for dealing with<br \/>\n\tthe objections nor invited anybody to present the documents in<br \/>\n\tsupport of their say that they are the members of the Trust and<br \/>\n\twithout any scrutiny, the provisional list was sorted out and a<br \/>\n\tshort list of 482 was declared. Originally when the provisional list<br \/>\n\twas published, 546 members were shown. The society previously had<br \/>\n\tmade an electoral roll wherein in the year 2001, there were 774<br \/>\n\tmembers. So far as the election of January, 2007 is concerned, the<br \/>\n\tsaid election was absolutely illegal and the Change Report<br \/>\n\tNo.416\/2007 filed by the respondent no.1-Trust was challenged by<br \/>\n\tfiling objections and the same is still pending and evidence is<br \/>\n\trecorded of the trustees of the trust.\n<\/p>\n<p>Mr.Gandhi<br \/>\n\tsubmitted that inspite of pendency of the previous Change Report<br \/>\n\tapplication, the notification of the new election has been declared<br \/>\n\tand public notices were published and the election is fixed on<br \/>\n\t10.03.2010, wherein several irregularities were committed by the<br \/>\n\trespondents in as much as dead persons and non-existing firms are<br \/>\n\tincluded in the electoral roll in spite of the knowledge to that<br \/>\n\teffect and legitimate and existing members are excluded without any<br \/>\n\treasons and 935 objections which were received by the respondent are<br \/>\n\tyet to be decided properly. He, therefore, submitted that entire<br \/>\n\tprogramme of election is illegal and such election cannot be<br \/>\n\tpermitted to be held.\n<\/p>\n<p>Mr.Gandhi<br \/>\n\tfurther submitted that so far as the petitioner is concerned, he has<br \/>\n\tproduced all relevant documents. Inspite of that the name of the<br \/>\n\tpetitioner&#8217;s firm is not included in the list nor the petitioner is<br \/>\n\tinformed about its objections. He has therefore submitted that the<br \/>\n\trelief as prayed for in the present petition is required to be<br \/>\n\tgranted and the election be postponed till the irregularities are<br \/>\n\tremoved and till the petitioner and many other, whose names were<br \/>\n\twrongly deleted from the electoral roll, are included.\n<\/p>\n<p>Mr.Soparkar<br \/>\n\tappearing for the respondents on the other hand submitted that the<br \/>\n\tpresent petition is not maintainable. The respondent no.1 and its<br \/>\n\ttrustees are the private individuals against whom no petition is<br \/>\n\tmaintainable before this Court. He has further submitted that the<br \/>\n\tCharity Commissioner has examined all the issues, which were raised<br \/>\n\tbefore him and has given a specific finding to the effect that as to<br \/>\n\twhy the petitioner&#8217;s name is deleted from the electoral roll list<br \/>\n\tand also submitted that all objections raised were duly considered<br \/>\n\tand, thereafter, the electoral list is published. It is true that<br \/>\n\tthe electoral list is finalized on 02.02.2010, however, for the<br \/>\n\tbenefit of the members at Bombay, further time was extended and the<br \/>\n\tBombay Office was also opened only with a view to smoothen the<br \/>\n\telectoral process. He has further submitted that the petitioner has<br \/>\n\tsuppressed certain facts. As a matter of fact, the petitioner,<br \/>\n\tbefore filing the present petitioner, has approached this Court by<br \/>\n\tway of Special Civil Application No.13505\/2009, which was disposed<br \/>\n\tof by this Court on 30.12.2009 permitting the petitioner to raise<br \/>\n\tall these contentions before the Competent Authority, under which,<br \/>\n\tthe respondent-Trust is functioning. Before issuance of such<br \/>\n\tdirections, the Court has referred to the decision of the Apex Court<br \/>\n\tin case of Election Commissioner of India V\/s. Ashokkumar &amp; Ors.<br \/>\n\treported in 2000(8) SCC 216, wherein it is held that once the<br \/>\n\telection process is put into motion, the Court should not normally<br \/>\n\tinterfere. He has therefore submitted that once the election is<br \/>\n\tover, the petitioner can raise all these disputes before the<br \/>\n\tCompetent Court. After the said order, the petitioner has filed an<br \/>\n\tapplication before the Charity Commissioner, which was rejected and<br \/>\n\tthe election is scheduled to be held on 10.03.2010 and before the<br \/>\n\tsaid election is over, the present petition is filed, which is not<br \/>\n\tto be entertained by this Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>Mr.Soparkar<br \/>\n\tfurther submitted that the petitioner has also suppressed very<br \/>\n\trelevant aspects that earlier the Division Bench in Letters Patent<br \/>\n\tAppeal No.1494\/2006 with Letters Patent Appeal No.1495\/2006 has<br \/>\n\tspecifically held that the grievances of the respondents about the<br \/>\n\tvalidity of the electoral roll cannot be gone into at this stage so<br \/>\n\tas to stall election process in exercise of power under Article 226<br \/>\n\tof the Constitution. The issues raised for challenging the election<br \/>\n\tof the respondent no.1-Trust with regard to nature and character of<br \/>\n\tTrustees, Councilors and Governing Body can also be raised and<br \/>\n\tdecided by the Charity Commissioner under various provisions of the<br \/>\n\tAct. The Division Bench after considering various authorities on the<br \/>\n\tissues had held that the directions of the Learned Single Judge to<br \/>\n\tpostpone the election of the Trust scheduled to be held on<br \/>\n\t18.11.2006 vide impugned order dated 17.11.2006 was contrary to law<br \/>\n\tlaid down by the Apex Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>This<br \/>\n\torder was challenged by the present petitioner before the Apex Court<br \/>\n\tand the Apex Court also dismissed the SLP by holding that it would<br \/>\n\tbe open to the petitioner to challenge the election before the<br \/>\n\tappropriate forum in accordance with law and any observations made<br \/>\n\tin the impugned order as to the firm will be of no consequence.\n<\/p>\n<p>Even<br \/>\n\ton merit, Mr.Soparkar has submitted that the respondent-Trust has<br \/>\n\tacted in accordance with law and as per the provisions laid down<br \/>\n\tunder the Act. All the objections were properly dealt with and<br \/>\n\tappropriate decision is taken in the matter. Since the petitioner<br \/>\n\tfailed to produce necessary documents with regard to continuance of<br \/>\n\tthe partnership firm, the name of the petitioner was deleted. The<br \/>\n\tCharity Commissioner has already dealt with this aspect and taken<br \/>\n\tview that the petitioner could not furnish the relevant documents so<br \/>\n\tas to satisfy the respondent-Trust that the partnership firm of<br \/>\n\twhich the petitioner is a partner is existing. He, therefore,<br \/>\n\tsubmitted that no inference be called for in the present petition<br \/>\n\tand the petition deserves to be summarily dismissed.\n<\/p>\n<p>Having<br \/>\n\theard learned advocates appearing for the parties and having<br \/>\n\tconsidered the documents on record and the legal authorities cited<br \/>\n\tbefore the Court, the Court is of the view that the election is<br \/>\n\tscheduled to be held on 10.03.2010, all formalities are over and at<br \/>\n\tthis state to postpone the election is not in the interest of<br \/>\n\tanybody and that too at the instance of the petitioner, whose name<br \/>\n\tis deleted from the electoral list. This very issue has come up<br \/>\n\tbefore the Court in earlier round of litigation and at that time<br \/>\n\talso, the Court has taken the view that the Court should not<br \/>\n\tinterfere once the election process is put into motion. The Division<br \/>\n\tBench has at length discussed this issue and gave specific finding<br \/>\n\ton this issue. Even the Apex Court also did not interfere with the<br \/>\n\tview taken by the Division Bench. Considering these aspects of the<br \/>\n\tmatter, there is no reason for this Court to take different view in<br \/>\n\tthe matter. Even otherwise, the petitioner is not remedyless as once<br \/>\n\tthe election result is declared, it is always open for the aggrieved<br \/>\n\tparties to challenge the said result before the appropriate forum.<br \/>\n\tIssue regarding the deletion of the petitioner&#8217;s name from the<br \/>\n\telectoral list can also be agitated before the appropriate forum<br \/>\n\tafter the result is declared. Issue raised on behalf of the<br \/>\n\tpetitioner with regard to casting of vote by dead person and\/or<br \/>\n\tfirm, which are not in existence can also be gone into by the<br \/>\n\tcompetent forum. Even otherwise, these are the disputed questions,<br \/>\n\twhich cannot be allowed to be raised or to be considered in the<br \/>\n\tpresent proceedings.\n<\/p>\n<p>Considering<br \/>\n\tthe entire facts and circumstances and further considering the scope<br \/>\n\tand ambit of the present petition in light of the exercise of powers<br \/>\n\tby this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the<br \/>\n\tCourt does not find any substance in the present petition and,<br \/>\n\thence, the petition is accordingly dismissed with no order as to<br \/>\n\tcost.\n<\/p>\n<p>[<br \/>\nK. A. Puj, J. ]<\/p>\n<p>\/patil<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n<p>\t\t   Top<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Shree vs Ahmedabad on 8 March, 2010 Author: K.A.Puj,&amp;Nbsp; Gujarat High Court Case Information System Print SCA\/2984\/2010 1\/ 8 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 2984 of 2010 ======================================================= SHREE GITA WOOD WORKS &amp; SAW MILL &#8211; Petitioner(s) Versus AHMEDABAD EDUCATION SOCIETY &amp; 7 &#8211; [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-118336","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-gujarat-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Shree vs Ahmedabad on 8 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shree-vs-ahmedabad-on-8-march-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Shree vs Ahmedabad on 8 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shree-vs-ahmedabad-on-8-march-2010\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2010-03-07T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-10-03T08:16:05+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shree-vs-ahmedabad-on-8-march-2010#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shree-vs-ahmedabad-on-8-march-2010\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Shree vs Ahmedabad on 8 March, 2010\",\"datePublished\":\"2010-03-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-10-03T08:16:05+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shree-vs-ahmedabad-on-8-march-2010\"},\"wordCount\":1814,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Gujarat High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shree-vs-ahmedabad-on-8-march-2010#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shree-vs-ahmedabad-on-8-march-2010\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shree-vs-ahmedabad-on-8-march-2010\",\"name\":\"Shree vs Ahmedabad on 8 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2010-03-07T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-10-03T08:16:05+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shree-vs-ahmedabad-on-8-march-2010#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shree-vs-ahmedabad-on-8-march-2010\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/shree-vs-ahmedabad-on-8-march-2010#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Shree vs Ahmedabad on 8 March, 2010\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Shree vs Ahmedabad on 8 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shree-vs-ahmedabad-on-8-march-2010","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Shree vs Ahmedabad on 8 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shree-vs-ahmedabad-on-8-march-2010","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2010-03-07T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-10-03T08:16:05+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shree-vs-ahmedabad-on-8-march-2010#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shree-vs-ahmedabad-on-8-march-2010"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Shree vs Ahmedabad on 8 March, 2010","datePublished":"2010-03-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-10-03T08:16:05+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shree-vs-ahmedabad-on-8-march-2010"},"wordCount":1814,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Gujarat High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shree-vs-ahmedabad-on-8-march-2010#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shree-vs-ahmedabad-on-8-march-2010","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shree-vs-ahmedabad-on-8-march-2010","name":"Shree vs Ahmedabad on 8 March, 2010 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2010-03-07T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-10-03T08:16:05+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shree-vs-ahmedabad-on-8-march-2010#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shree-vs-ahmedabad-on-8-march-2010"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/shree-vs-ahmedabad-on-8-march-2010#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Shree vs Ahmedabad on 8 March, 2010"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/118336","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=118336"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/118336\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=118336"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=118336"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=118336"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}