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

Gujarat vs Texmaco on 30 November, 2010

Author: A.L.Dave

Bench: A.L.Dave

   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/14813/2005	 2/ 2	JUDGMENT 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 14813 of 2005
 

 
For
Approval and Signature:  
 
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE
 
 
=========================================================

 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

1
		
		 
			 

Whether
			Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
		
	

 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

2
		
		 
			 

To be
			referred to the Reporter or not ?
		
	

 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

3
		
		 
			 

Whether
			their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
		
	

 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

4
		
		 
			 

Whether
			this case involves a substantial question of law as to the
			interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order
			made thereunder ?
		
	

 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

5
		
		 
			 

Whether
			it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
		
	

 

 
=========================================================

 

GUJARAT
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTCORPORATION - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

TEXMACO
CRIMPERS TEXTURIZERS - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
MB GANDHI for
Petitioner(s) : 1, 
MR DAKSHESH MEHTA for Respondent(s) :
1, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 30/11/2010  
 
ORAL JUDGMENT

During the course of hearing, it is noticed that there are number of errors in the order impugned while referring to the relevant documents and their exhibits and it is difficult to reconcile as to on what counts the application of the petitioner requesting for setting aside the ex-parte decree is rejected without any order on application for condonation of delay.

2. In this set of circumstances, without entering into merits and upon consensus of the advocates for the parties, the order in question is set aside and the matter is remanded to the trial Court for deciding the petitioner's application for delay condonation in the first instance and then if the delay is condoned, to decide the application for setting aside the decree. The trial Court is further directed to decide the delay condonation application within a period of three months from the date of receipt of writ of this Court.

3. Rule made absolute accordingly. No costs.

(A.L. DAVE, J.) zgs/-

    Top