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

Cipla Limited vs M/S Palak Pharma & on 11 September, 2017

Author: C.L.Soni

Bench: C.L. Soni

                    C/CA/11511/2017                                            ORDER



                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

              CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 11511 of
                                              2017
                                               In
               APPEAL FROM ORDER-STAMP NUMBER NO. 325 of 2017
         ==========================================================
                            CIPLA LIMITED....Applicant(s)
                                      Versus
                      M/S PALAK PHARMA & 1....Respondent(s)
         ==========================================================
         Appearance:
         MR MIHIR THAKORE, SENIOR ADVOCATE with MR RAHUL R DHOLAKIA,
         ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1
         DS AFF.NOT FILED (R) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
         RULE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 1
         ==========================================================
          CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.L. SONI

                                      Date : 11/09/2017


                                       ORAL ORDER

1. Learned senior advocate Mr. Mihir Thakore appearing with learned advocate Mr. Dholakia for the applicant states that since the opponent No.2 is a formal party, the applicant may be permitted to delete the opponent No.2. He further states that since the applicant seeks permission to delete opponent No.2 from the proceedings of the present Civil Application, he will also seek permission for deletion of the respondent No.2 from the Appeal from Order as and when the Appeal from Order is placed for hearing.

2. In view of the above, the applicant is permitted to delete opponent No.2 from the proceedings of the present Civil Application. Necessary amendment for deleting the opponent No.2 from the cause title of the present application shall be carried out forthwith.

3. The only opponent is now the opponent No.1. The opponent Page 1 of 2 HC-NIC Page 1 of 2 Created On Tue Sep 12 00:31:51 IST 2017 C/CA/11511/2017 ORDER No.1 has not responded to the rule issued by this Court though it is duly served with the rule.

4. The Court having heard learned senior advocate Mr. Thakore and having considered the explanation provided in the application, finds that the applicant could be said to have made out sufficient cause for the purpose of condoning the delay occurred in filing the Appeal from Order.

5. In view of the above, the application is allowed. Delay of 120 days occurred in filing the Appeal from Order is condoned. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Office shall notify the Appeal from Order for hearing on 13th September 2017.

(C.L.SONI, J.) Omkar Page 2 of 2 HC-NIC Page 2 of 2 Created On Tue Sep 12 00:31:51 IST 2017