Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Gujarat High Court

Bhagyeshbhai Chunilal Patel vs Kailashben Ranchodbhai Patel on 1 August, 2014

Author: S.H.Vora

Bench: S.H.Vora

           C/AO/258/2014                                 ORDER




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                  APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 258 of 2014
                                   With
                    CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6260 of 2014
                                     In
                   APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 258 of 2014
================================================================
            BHAGYESHBHAI CHUNILAL PATEL....Appellant(s)
                            Versus
           KAILASHBEN RANCHODBHAI PATEL....Respondent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR PARESH M DARJI, ADVOCATE for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR MANISH J PATEL, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================

       CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.H.VORA

                             Date : 01/08/2014


                              ORAL ORDER

1. Challenge in this appeal is the order dated 25.04.2014 passed by the learned 4th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural), Mirzapur below Exh.5 in Special Civil Suit No.399 of 2013 whereby, application Exh.5 came to be refused.

2. After making some submissions, learned advocate Mr.P.M. Darji for the appellant does not invite reasoned order but states that considering the lis involved in the suit, the learned trial Judge may be directed to expedite hearing of the suit and decide the same as expeditiously as possible so that lis involved in the matter can be adjudicated at an earliest point of time.

3. Considering the lis involved in the matter, the learned trial Judge is directed to expedite hearing of the suit and decide the same on merits as early as possible within a period of one year from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

4. While parting with the order, it is clarified that this Court has examined the impugned order passed by the learned trial Judge within the limited scope of provisions of Order 43 Rule 1(r) of the Code, whereas the main controversy involved in the suit is at large before the trial Court to be adjudicated through full-fledge trial. Therefore, the learned trial Judge shall not be influenced by any observations recorded in the impugned order while deciding the suit at the end of trial. The findings recorded either by the trial Court or by this Court at interlocutory stage of the suit are tentative in its nature and the learned trial Judge shall decide the case on its merits and as per evidence that may be led during the course of trial and in accordance with law. Parties to the suit are also directed to co-operate with the learned trial Judge and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments.

5. In view of the above, present Appeal from Order stands disposed of.

Order in Civil Application In view of the order passed in the Appeal from Order, this application does not survive and the same is also disposed of.

(S.H.VORA, J.) Hitesh Page 3 of 3