{"id":25202,"date":"2001-10-17T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2001-10-16T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/regional-authority-and-vs-navinchandra-p-joshi-on-17-october-2001"},"modified":"2016-08-15T09:38:49","modified_gmt":"2016-08-15T04:08:49","slug":"regional-authority-and-vs-navinchandra-p-joshi-on-17-october-2001","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/regional-authority-and-vs-navinchandra-p-joshi-on-17-october-2001","title":{"rendered":"Regional Authority And &#8230; vs Navinchandra P. Joshi on 17 October, 2001"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Gujarat High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Regional Authority And &#8230; vs Navinchandra P. Joshi on 17 October, 2001<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: B Shethna<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: B Shethna<\/div>\n<\/p>\n<pre><\/pre>\n<p>JUDGMENT<\/p>\n<p>B.J.Shethna, J.<\/p>\n<p>1. The appellants have challenged in this appeal theimpugned order dated<br \/>\n7.5.1999 passed by the learned CivilJudge (S.D.), Vadodara below Ex.5 in Special<br \/>\nCivil SuitNo.314 of 1999 filed by the respondent-plaintiff wherebythe learned<br \/>\njudge allowed the application Ex.5 andconfirmed ex-parte ad-interim relief<br \/>\ngranted earlier infavour of the respondent-plaintiff in terms of para 14(A)of<br \/>\nthe application. While granting this relief theappellant-bank is restrained from<br \/>\nproceeding further withthe departmental inquiry against the respondent-<br \/>\nplaintiffwho was its employee working as Manager of satellitebranch of Pavagadh<br \/>\ntill the final disposal of criminalcase filed against the respondent-<br \/>\nplaintiff.\n<\/p>\n<p>2. The respondent-plaintiff was serving at PavagadhOffice as In-Charge<br \/>\n(S.O.C. Satellite Office) HalolBranch, Halol. He was the only person posted at<br \/>\nPavagadhoffice, therefore, he has to discharge the duties ofclerk to manager. On<br \/>\n20.7.1997, the appellant-banklodged FIR before CBI Police Station against<br \/>\ntherespondent-plaintiff and other accused for committingfraud with the bank to<br \/>\nthe tune of Rs.1.42 crores.Accordingly,FIRwas registered againstrespondent-<br \/>\nplaintiff and others for various offencespunishable under Sections 120B, 420, 465, 471 and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of Prevention ofCorruption<br \/>\nAct, 1988. The respondent-plaintiff wasplaced under suspension and served with<br \/>\nthe charge sheetdated 11.2.1999 for misappropriation, corruption andfraud played<br \/>\nwith the bank and the public money in croresof rupees. The respondent was<br \/>\nsuperannuated from serviceon 31.5.1999, therefore, just before few days of<br \/>\nhisretirement he approached the learned Civil Judge (S.D.),Baroda by way of<br \/>\nSpecial Civil Suit No.314 of 1999 on1.4.1999 with an application Ex.5 praying<br \/>\nthat the bankbe restrained from further proceedings with thedepartmental inquiry<br \/>\nin pursuance to the charge sheetdated 11.2.1999 submitted against it on the<br \/>\nground thatthe bank wants to proceed against him on the same chargesfor which<br \/>\nthe criminal case is registered against himwith CBI.\n<\/p>\n<p>3. Learned Judge without assigning any reasonspassed an ex-parte order in<br \/>\nfavour of therespondent-plaintiff in terms of para 14(A) of hisapplication on<br \/>\n1.4.1999 while issuing show cause noticeto the bank. Thus, the learned Judge, in<br \/>\nclear violationof provisions of Order 39 Rule 2 of Code of CivilProcedure passed<br \/>\nthe mandatory ad-interim injunction infavour of the respondent-plaintiff. After<br \/>\nhearing thebank the learned Judge by his impugned order dated7.5.1999 confirmed<br \/>\nex-parte ad-interim order grantedearlier by him and allowed the application<br \/>\nEx.5. Thisorder is challenged by the appellant-bank by way of thisappeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>4. On behalf of appellant-bank it was vehementlysubmitted by Dr.Thakar that<br \/>\nthe learned Judge hascommitted grave error in passing the ex-parte ad-<br \/>\ninterimorder without assigning any reason and later onconfirming interim relief<br \/>\nwithout properly consideringthe fact that the charges are not similar to<br \/>\ntheallegations made against the respondent-plaintiff in theFIR filed before the<br \/>\nCBI. He also submitted that whenthe offences are committed by the respondent-<br \/>\nplaintiffthen the criminal complaint has to be filed by the bankand accordingly<br \/>\nit was filed. He submitted that in thecriminal complaint, the respondent-<br \/>\nplaintiff is not theonly person but many other persons are also there asaccused<br \/>\nand one of them is absconding. He, therefore,submitted that if the bank is not<br \/>\nallowed to proceedfurther with the respondent in the departmental inquiryon the<br \/>\nground that the criminal case is pending againstthe respondent-plaintiff then,<br \/>\nwith the lapse of time nowitnesses will be available in the departmental<br \/>\ninquirybecause ordinarily it takes years in final disposal ofthe criminal cases<br \/>\nbefore the criminal court, which wouldnot be in the interest of justice. He<br \/>\nfurther submittedthat when there are serious charges against therespondent-<br \/>\nplaintiff of committing fraud with the bankand misappropriating funds running<br \/>\ninto crores of rupeesthen the bank should be allowed to proceed further withthe<br \/>\ndepartmental inquiry. He submitted that therespondent will be at liberty to<br \/>\ndefend him in thedepartmental inquiry and he can be punished only if he isfound<br \/>\nguilty at the end of the departmental proceedings.If he proves his innocence<br \/>\nthen he can certainly beexonerated. Relying upon several Hon&#8217;ble Supreme<br \/>\nCourtjudgments he submitted that mere pendency of the criminalcase should not<br \/>\ncome in the way of the bank to proceedfurther by way of departmental proceedings<br \/>\nagainst itsemployee.\n<\/p>\n<p>5. As against that learned counsel Shri Thakkar forthe respondent-plaintiff<br \/>\nsubmitted that the chargeslevelled against the respondent-plaintiff are<br \/>\nidenticalto the charges levelled against him in the criminalcomplaint,<br \/>\ntherefore, it will cause prejudice to theplaintiff in his defence if<br \/>\ndepartmental proceedings ispermitted to be proceed further. According to him<br \/>\nwhenthe criminal case is filed against him then burdenheavily lies upon the<br \/>\nprosecution to prove its caseagainst the respondent-plaintiff beyond reasonable<br \/>\ndoubtand in criminal case he is not required to open hismouth. Whereas, in<br \/>\ndepartmental proceedings he has todisclose his defence which may come in his way<br \/>\nduring thetrial of criminal case. In support of his submission hehas placed<br \/>\nreliance upon Hon&#8217;ble Supreme Court judgmentreported in (i) 1993(3) SC 376, (ii)<br \/>\nAIR 1865 SC 155, andDivision Bench of this court reported in 1991(1) GLH (UJ)2.<br \/>\nHe has also submitted that when complicated questionsof law and facts are<br \/>\ninvolved in the matter and chargesare of grave and serious nature levelled<br \/>\nagainst thedelinquent, then on the same sets of facts the bankshould not be<br \/>\nallowed to proceed with the departmentalinquiry. Lastly he submitted that after<br \/>\nservice of thecharge sheet in 1999 the respondent-plaintiff issuperannuated from<br \/>\nservice in May, 1999, therefore, bankis not going to suffer any financial loss<br \/>\nby payingsubsistence allowance. He also submitted that if therespondent-<br \/>\nplaintiff is found guilty by the competentcourt then on conviction his services<br \/>\ncan very well beterminated by bank without holding any inquiry. He alsosubmitted<br \/>\nthat when the learned Judge has exercised hisdiscretion in favour of the<br \/>\nplaintiff and restraineddefendant-Bank from further proceedings with<br \/>\nthedepartmental inquiry then this court should not interferewith such<br \/>\ndiscretionary order.\n<\/p>\n<p>6. I have carefully considered the rival submissionsmade by learned counsel<br \/>\nfor the parties. I have alsocarefully gone through the judgment of the<br \/>\nHon&#8217;bleSupreme Court as well as of this court cited by thelearned counsel for<br \/>\nthe parties in support of thesubmissions. Having carefully gone through the same<br \/>\nImust say that neither the Hon&#8217;ble Supreme Court nor thiscourt has laid down<br \/>\nthat whenever there is a criminalcase registered against the person then he<br \/>\ncannot bedealt by way of departmental proceedings. It dependsupon facts of each<br \/>\ncase. In a given case court may thinkit proper to restrain the employer from<br \/>\nproceedingfurther with the departmental inquiry when the criminalcase is filed.<br \/>\nIf it is satisfied that prejudice islikely to be caused and in a given case<br \/>\ncourt may notinterfere.\n<\/p>\n<p>7. Coming to the facts of the instant case it primafacie appears that the<br \/>\nrespondent-plaintiff was the onlyperson posted at Pavagadh office of the bank<br \/>\nand theallegation made against him is that he has committedserious misconduct<br \/>\nand committed fraud of crores ofrupees against the bank. The appellant-bank<br \/>\nwanted toproceed against the respondent-plaintiff on the followinggrounds :-\n<\/p>\n<p>(i) The plaintiff committed gross error in not issuing NRI deposit and<br \/>\nissuing domestic term deposit, which was a clear violation of the guidelines of<br \/>\nthe Bank and Reserve Bank of India.\n<\/p>\n<p>(ii) The plaintiff collected account payee draft favouring Shri D.C. Patel<br \/>\nand A.D. Patel for a third party namely Bombay Engineering and Training Company.<br \/>\nThe amount was credited in the account without waiting for actual<br \/>\nrealisation.\n<\/p>\n<p>(iii) The plaintiff instead of issuing Foreign Currency Non-Resident<br \/>\ndeposit in name of Shri A.D. Patel, D.C. Patel, P.I.Patel, M.D.Patel and<br \/>\nN.M.Patel, converted the same in Indian rupees. This resulted in huge exchange<br \/>\nloss to the bank.\n<\/p>\n<p>(iv) The plaintiff received cheque of Rs.25 lacs drawn on Allahabad Bank,<br \/>\nGandhinagar for issuing FDR in the name of Gujarat Panchayat Varg Vikas Nigam,<br \/>\nGandhinagar and unauthorisedly credited the amount in the account of Bombay<br \/>\nEngineering &amp; Trading Company.\n<\/p>\n<p>(v) That the plaintiff received cheques worth Rs.70 lacs for issuing FDR<br \/>\nin the name of Sainik Welfare Resettlement Board and credited the amount in<br \/>\ncurrent account of Bombay Engineering and Trading Company which was withdrawn<br \/>\nfrom the account.\n<\/p>\n<p>(vi) The plaintiff received cheques of Rs.59,30,753\/= from Executive<br \/>\nEngineer, ECP, GIDC, Vadodara for issuing FDR which he unauthorisedly credited<br \/>\nin the account of Bombay Engineering and Trading Company.\n<\/p>\n<p>(vii) The plaintiff had given credit of Rs.25 lacs in the account of<br \/>\nBombay Engineering and Trading Company wrongfully without receiving the proceeds<br \/>\nand open FDR in name of Gujarat Panchayat Varg Vikas Nigam.\n<\/p>\n<p>(viii) The plaintiff unauthroisedly issued 3 pay orders of Rs.10 lacs each<br \/>\non 26.2.1997 without obtaining any application from or actually receiving any<br \/>\nfunds or passing any voucher.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>8. The above charges cannot be said to be similar tothe charges levelled<br \/>\nagainst him in the criminal case.Having close scrutiny of the averments made in<br \/>\nthe FIRand the charges levelled against him in the departmentalproceedings it<br \/>\ncannot be said that the charges areborrowed from the FIR from the same sets of<br \/>\nfacts.\n<\/p>\n<p>9. There is lot of substance in the submission madeby Thakkar that the<br \/>\nrespondent-plaintiff quietly go onaccepting subsisting allowance from 1997 to<br \/>\n1999 till thesubmission of the charge sheet while remaining undersuspension and<br \/>\nit is only when he was served with chargesheet then in the last days of his<br \/>\nretirement heapproached civil court by way of suit and obtainedex-parte ad-<br \/>\ninterim injunction without reasons.\n<\/p>\n<p>10. On peculiar facts and circumstances of the case,I am fully satisfied<br \/>\nthat no prejudice is going to becaused to the respondent-plaintiff if he is<br \/>\ndealt with indepartmental inquiry by the bank. If he is innocent hecan certainly<br \/>\nprove his innocence even in thedepartmental inquiry. Dr.Thakar was right in<br \/>\nsubmittingthat when there are other accused along withrespondent-plaintiff in<br \/>\nCBI case and one of them isabsconding, then the criminal case is not going to<br \/>\nbeover soon and it is definitely going to take long time.The respondent-<br \/>\nplaintiff has retired from service,therefore, it is desirable that during his<br \/>\nexistence thedepartmental inquiry is over. If the bank is not allowedto be<br \/>\nproceeded further with the departmental inquirythen after lapse of some years it<br \/>\nwill not be able to getany evidence and the witnesses also may not be<br \/>\navailable.When the person in the rank of officer of the bankagainst whom serious<br \/>\nallegations are made formisappropriation of crores of rupees then in<br \/>\nmyconsidered opinion the departmental proceedings cannot bestayed till final<br \/>\ndisposal of the criminal case filedagainst him. It is a case of public money,<br \/>\ntherefore, Iam of the considered opinion that the learned Judge waswrong in<br \/>\ncoming to the conclusion that therespondent-plaintiff had prima facie case and<br \/>\nthatbalance of convenience was also in his favour and theirreparable loss would<br \/>\nbe caused to him. In the instantcase, the plaintiff has miserably failed to<br \/>\nprove anyprima facie case in his favour. The balance ofconvenience was never in<br \/>\nhis favour and no irreparableloss is going to be caused if the bank is permitted<br \/>\ntoproceed with the departmental proceedings.\n<\/p>\n<p>11. Before parting, I must state that in this type ofcases where there<br \/>\nis a fraud played upon the financialinstitutions like banks, in such type of<br \/>\ncases, courtsshould be slow in granting injunction.\n<\/p>\n<p>12. In view of the above discussion, this appeal isallowed. Impugned<br \/>\njudgment and order dated 7.5.1999passed by the learned Civil Judge (S.D.),<br \/>\nBaroda belowEx.5 in Special Civil Suit No.314 of 1999 confirming hisearlier ex-<br \/>\nparte ad-interim order dated 9.4.1999 ishereby quashed and set aside. The<br \/>\nappellant bank ispermitted to proceed further with therespondent-plaintiff by<br \/>\nway of departmental inquiry andcomplete the same as early as possible because<br \/>\ntherespondent has already crossed the age of 60.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Gujarat High Court Regional Authority And &#8230; vs Navinchandra P. Joshi on 17 October, 2001 Author: B Shethna Bench: B Shethna JUDGMENT B.J.Shethna, J. 1. The appellants have challenged in this appeal theimpugned order dated 7.5.1999 passed by the learned CivilJudge (S.D.), Vadodara below Ex.5 in Special Civil SuitNo.314 of 1999 filed by the respondent-plaintiff [&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-25202","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 v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Regional Authority And ... vs Navinchandra P. Joshi on 17 October, 2001 - 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\/regional-authority-and-vs-navinchandra-p-joshi-on-17-october-2001\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Regional Authority And ... vs Navinchandra P. Joshi on 17 October, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/regional-authority-and-vs-navinchandra-p-joshi-on-17-october-2001\" \/>\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=\"2001-10-16T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-08-15T04:08:49+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\\\/regional-authority-and-vs-navinchandra-p-joshi-on-17-october-2001#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/regional-authority-and-vs-navinchandra-p-joshi-on-17-october-2001\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Regional Authority And &#8230; vs Navinchandra P. Joshi on 17 October, 2001\",\"datePublished\":\"2001-10-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-08-15T04:08:49+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/regional-authority-and-vs-navinchandra-p-joshi-on-17-october-2001\"},\"wordCount\":1882,\"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\\\/regional-authority-and-vs-navinchandra-p-joshi-on-17-october-2001#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/regional-authority-and-vs-navinchandra-p-joshi-on-17-october-2001\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/regional-authority-and-vs-navinchandra-p-joshi-on-17-october-2001\",\"name\":\"Regional Authority And ... vs Navinchandra P. Joshi on 17 October, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2001-10-16T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-08-15T04:08:49+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/regional-authority-and-vs-navinchandra-p-joshi-on-17-october-2001#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/regional-authority-and-vs-navinchandra-p-joshi-on-17-october-2001\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/regional-authority-and-vs-navinchandra-p-joshi-on-17-october-2001#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Regional Authority And &#8230; vs Navinchandra P. Joshi on 17 October, 2001\"}]},{\"@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":"Regional Authority And ... vs Navinchandra P. Joshi on 17 October, 2001 - 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\/regional-authority-and-vs-navinchandra-p-joshi-on-17-october-2001","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Regional Authority And ... vs Navinchandra P. Joshi on 17 October, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/regional-authority-and-vs-navinchandra-p-joshi-on-17-october-2001","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2001-10-16T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-08-15T04:08:49+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\/regional-authority-and-vs-navinchandra-p-joshi-on-17-october-2001#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/regional-authority-and-vs-navinchandra-p-joshi-on-17-october-2001"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Regional Authority And &#8230; vs Navinchandra P. Joshi on 17 October, 2001","datePublished":"2001-10-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-08-15T04:08:49+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/regional-authority-and-vs-navinchandra-p-joshi-on-17-october-2001"},"wordCount":1882,"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\/regional-authority-and-vs-navinchandra-p-joshi-on-17-october-2001#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/regional-authority-and-vs-navinchandra-p-joshi-on-17-october-2001","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/regional-authority-and-vs-navinchandra-p-joshi-on-17-october-2001","name":"Regional Authority And ... vs Navinchandra P. Joshi on 17 October, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2001-10-16T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-08-15T04:08:49+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/regional-authority-and-vs-navinchandra-p-joshi-on-17-october-2001#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/regional-authority-and-vs-navinchandra-p-joshi-on-17-october-2001"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/regional-authority-and-vs-navinchandra-p-joshi-on-17-october-2001#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Regional Authority And &#8230; vs Navinchandra P. Joshi on 17 October, 2001"}]},{"@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\/25202","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=25202"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/25202\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=25202"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=25202"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=25202"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}