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 0]

Gujarat High Court

Sursingh Motisingh Chauhan vs State Of Gujarat....Opponent(S) on 31 March, 2016

Author: Harsha Devani

Bench: Harsha Devani, G.R.Udhwani

                  C/MCA/1089/2016                                                   ORDER




                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

           MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR MODIFICATION OF ORDER) NO. 1089 of 2016
                                                   In
                                 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 901 of 2016
                                                   In
                         SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13550 of 2000

         ==========================================================
                       SURSINGH MOTISINGH CHAUHAN....Applicant(s)
                                       Versus
                            STATE OF GUJARAT....Opponent(s)
         ==========================================================
         Appearance:
         THAKKAR AND PAHWA ADVOCATES, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
         ADVANCE COPY SERVED TO GP/PP for the Opponent(s) No. 1
         ==========================================================

          CORAM: HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI
                 and
                 HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.UDHWANI

                                          Date : 31/03/2016


                                           ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI)

1. By this application, the applicant seeks modification of the order dated 15.02.2016 passed by this court in Civil Application No.901 of 2016, to the extent the court has referred to the plot of the petitioner as bearing No.472/1 in Sector-12 in Gandhinagar, instead of plot No.471/1.

2. Heard Mr. Saumitra Chaturvedi, learned advocate for Thakkar and Pahwa Associates, learned Page 1 of 2 HC-NIC Page 1 of 2 Created On Fri Apr 01 01:50:41 IST 2016 C/MCA/1089/2016 ORDER advocates for the applicant and Mr. Hardik Vora, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent.

3. On a perusal of the record of the case, it is evident that due to inadvertence, the applicant in the prayers made in Civil Application No.901 of 2016 had wrongly mentioned the plot number to be 472/1, instead of 471/1. Under the circumstances, the relief prayed in the present application is required to be granted by correcting the plot number.

4. The application, therefore, succeeds and is accordingly allowed. In the order dated 15.02.2016 passed by this court in Civil Application No.901 of 2016, the words plot No.472/1 shall stand substituted by the words plot No.471/1. The application stands disposed of accordingly.

(HARSHA DEVANI, J.) (G.R.UDHWANI, J.) sompura Page 2 of 2 HC-NIC Page 2 of 2 Created On Fri Apr 01 01:50:41 IST 2016