Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Gujarat High Court

Mahemdabad Municipality vs Rajubhai M Sodha Parmar & on 7 December, 2016

Author: K.M.Thaker

Bench: K.M.Thaker

                  C/SCA/417/2014                                              ORDER




                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                     SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 417 of 2014
                                             TO
                      SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 426 of 2014
         ==========================================================
                      MAHEMDABAD MUNICIPALITY....Petitioner(s)
                                     Versus
                   RAJUBHAI M SODHA PARMAR & 1....Respondent(s)
         ==========================================================
         Appearance:
         MR DEEPAK P SANCHELA, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
         MR AS ASTHAVADI, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1
         MR PARITOSH CALLA, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2
         ==========================================================

          CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER

                                     Date : 07/12/2016


                                   COMMON ORAL ORDER

1. On 17.10.2016, this Court passed below quoted  order: 

"1. In respect of the captioned petitions, an advance  Notice   was   placed   on   the   Notice   Board   on   7.10.2016  whereby the parties / learned advocates were informed  that the petitions will be taken up for Final Hearing  at  2.30 p.m.    The captioned petitions  were listed  at  Sr.Nos.36 to 45 in the Cause List which was placed on  Notice   Board  on   7.10.2016.  Accordingly,  the   petitions  were listed for hearing on 14.10.2016. Despite the said  advance intimation, time was granted to the parties on  14.10.2016 and the matters came to be adjourned today,  i.e. 17.10.2016. 

2. When the matters are called out and taken up for  hearing,   learned   advocate   for   the   respondent   is   not  present.   Learned   advocate   for   the   petitioner   is   also  not   present.     The   Court   is   informed   that   learned  advocate for  the petitioner has filed  sick note.    In  Page 1 of 2 HC-NIC Page 1 of 2 Created On Thu Dec 08 00:25:42 IST 2016 C/SCA/417/2014 ORDER this   view   of   the   matter,   the   Court   is   compelled   to  adjourn the hearing of the captioned petitions. 

3. It is, however, clarified that on the next date,  hearing   will   not   be   adjourned   on   any   ground   and  appropriate   orders   will   be   passed   even   if   learned  advocates are not present.   It is also clarified that  leave note or sick note will not be considered. 

S.O. to 19.10.2016."

2. After   the   said   order   present   petitions   are  listed   in   Today's   Cause   List.   Mr.Sanchela,  learned   advocate   is   present,   however,  Mr.Asthavadi,   learned   advocate   is   not  present.   In   view   of   the   submission   and  request   by   learned   advocate   Mr.Sanchela,   a  day's   time   is   granted   and   proceedings   are  adjourned to 8.12.2016.

3. To be listed amongst first 5 matters.  

4. If learned advocate for the respondent is not  present,   appropriate   order   will   be   passed   after  hearing learned advocate for the petitioner.

(K.M.THAKER, J.) Bharat Page 2 of 2 HC-NIC Page 2 of 2 Created On Thu Dec 08 00:25:42 IST 2016