Gujarat High Court
Fortis vs Gsl(India) on 29 June, 2011
Author: K.M.Thaker
Bench: K.M.Thaker
COMP/286/1999 2/ 2 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD COMPANY PETITION No. 286 of 1999 ========================================= FORTIS FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD. Versus GSL(INDIA) LTD. ========================================= Appearance : MR PC KAVINA for Petitioner MR RAJNI H MEHTA for Petitioner MR AC GANDHI for Respondent ========================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER Date : 29/06/2011 ORAL ORDER
1. The petition is of the year 1999.
2. In 2007, it was recorded that the proceedings are pending before the A.A.I.F.R. In subsequent orders, it is mentioned that the proceedings are pending before the B.I.F.R. The present present petition has remained pending and has been adjourned from time to time on the ground that the proceedings are pending before the A.A.I.F.R. or B.I.F.R.
3. When the petition is taken up for hearing, the learned advocates appearing for the parties are not present. Hence, S.O. to 19th July, 2011.
[ K. M. THAKER, J. ] (vijay) After the aforesaid order was dictated, Mr. AC Gandhi, learned advocate for the respondent appeared and submitted that since long time, he has not been receiving any instructions from his client i.e. respondent - Company. He also submitted that since it was not possible for learned advocate for the respondent to take instructions, notice of retirement in accordance with the High Court Rules was issued and the acknowledgment of service has been recently received. He also submitted that besides the present petition, there are other similar 18 petitions against the respondent and in respect of all the matters, he has issued notice for retirement. He requested that all the petitions may be listed and appropriate orders may be passed.
It will be necessary for learned advocate to file appropriate application seeking permission to retire after the notice has been served. Learned advocate may move appropriate application and seek appropriate orders. Subject to the aforesaid further observation earlier part of the order shall operate.
[ K. M. THAKER, J. ] vijay