Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat & 2 vs Sureshbhai Armshibhai Parmar & 19 on 10 March, 2016
Author: S.H.Vora
Bench: S.H.Vora
C/SCA/8392/2013 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8392 of 2013
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT & 2....Petitioner(s)
Versus
SURESHBHAI ARMSHIBHAI PARMAR & 19....Respondent(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR ALPESH BHATT, AGP for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 - 3
DECESED LITIGANT, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 8
MR AJ SHASTRI, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2 - 6 , 12 - 18 , 20
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 1 , 7 , 9 - 11 , 19
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.H.VORA
Date : 10/03/2016
ORAL ORDER
1. With the consent of learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, the present petition is taken up for final disposal today.
2. By way of this petition, the petitioner - State of Gujarat challenges order dated 9.8.2011 passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Junagadh in Misc. Civil Appeal No.42 of 2007, whereby the learned appellate Judge accepted the appeal to the extent of condition imposed by the learned trial Judge while deciding application Exh.5 in Regular Civil Suit No.213 of 2006.
3. Having heard the submissions made at bar and Page 1 of 2 HC-NIC Page 1 of 2 Created On Fri Mar 11 02:28:53 IST 2016 C/SCA/8392/2013 ORDER considering the observations made by the learned appellate Judge in para 6 of the impugned order, it appears that the parties appearing before the learned appellate Judge arrived at consensus and invited the impugned order from the learned Principal District Judge and accordingly, the learned Principal District Judge modified certain conditions as agreed before the Court. In light of this, there is no reason on the part of the State of Gujarat to prefer petition as parties to the proceedings invited order by consent. Apart from it, it appears that the order passed below Exh.5 is in operation since 2006 and any change now at this stage may change the equity and may create further prejudice to the parties to the suit. In light of this position and considering the impugned order, the learned trial Judge is directed to expedite the hearing of the suit and decide the same as early as possible, but not later than eighteen months from the date of receipt of this order. The learned trial Judge shall decide the suit on its own merit without influenced by the observations recorded in the impugned order and the observations recorded in this order. The parties are directed to cooperate with the learned trial Judge and shall not seek unnecessary adjournments. It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merit of the impugned order.
4. With this, present petition stands disposed of. Notice discharged.
(S.H.VORA, J.) shekhar Page 2 of 2 HC-NIC Page 2 of 2 Created On Fri Mar 11 02:28:53 IST 2016