Shakraji Ambaram Thakore vs Arvind Mills Ltd on 23 January, 2020

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Shakraji Ambaram Thakore vs Arvind Mills Ltd on 23 January, 2020

Bench: R.P.Dholaria

       C/FA/3626/2013                                      IA ORDER



        IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

  CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 1 of 2014
                 In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3626 of 2013
                                With
  CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 2 of 2019
                 In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3626 of 2013
                                With
       CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR BRINGING HEIRS) NO. 2 of 2014
                 In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3626 of 2013
                               With
       CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR BRINGING HEIRS) NO. 1 of 2019
                 In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 3626 of 2013
===========================================================

SHAKRAJI AMBARAM THAKORE Versus ARVIND MILLS LTD =============================================================== Appearance:

ADVOCATE NOTICE SERVED for the PETITIONER(s) No. HARSHIT M KARATHIA for the PETITIONER(s) No. MR SHITAL R PATEL for the RESPONDENT(s) No. RULE SERVED for the RESPONDENT(s) No. UNSERVED EXPIRED (R) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. =============================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.DHOLARIA Date : 23/01/2020 COMMON IA ORDER IN CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 1 of 2014 AND CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 2 of 2019 Heard learned advocates for the respective parties.

2. Learned advocate Mr. Shital Patel has seriously contended that the delay is inordinate which was within the knowledge and the compromise was entered into with one of the appellants pending consideration of appeal and the delay is therefore does not deserve to be condoned.

Page 1 of 2 Downloaded on : Sat Jan 25 21:41:05 IST 2020

             C/FA/3626/2013                                            IA ORDER



3.      Having           heard         learned         advocates           for        the

respective parties and on overall consideration of the matter, this Court is of the considered opinion that be that as it may and in view of what is contended by learned advocate Mr. Patel, his right is kept open for contesting the issue as regards selling part of his portion which may be appreciated by the appellate court in accordance with the provisions of law.

4. With the above observation, these applications seeking condonation of delay are allowed.

COMMON ORDER IN CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR BRINGING HEIRS) NO. 2 of 2014 AND CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR BRINGING HEIRS) NO. 1 of 2019 Heard learned advocates for the respective parties.

Having heard learned advocates for the respective parties and having gone through the averments made in the application, these applications for bringing legal heirs deserve to be allowed and are allowed accordingly.

(R.P.DHOLARIA, J) chandrashekhar Page 2 of 2 Downloaded on : Sat Jan 25 21:41:05 IST 2020

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Gujarat High Court