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 3, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Bombay Veraval Transport Company - A ... vs Surat Municipal Corporation on 16 March, 2016

Author: A.J.Desai

Bench: A.J.Desai

                   C/SCA/1212/2016                                              ORDER




                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                      SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1212 of 2016

         ==========================================================
              BOMBAY VERAVAL TRANSPORT COMPANY - A PARTNERSHIP
                               FIRM....Petitioner(s)
                                     Versus
                  SURAT MUNICIPAL CORPORATION....Respondent(s)
         ==========================================================
         Appearance:
         MR NV GANDHI, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
         MR DHAVAL G NANAVATI, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1
         ==========================================================

          CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.J.DESAI

                                     Date : 16/03/2016


                                       ORAL ORDER

1. RULE. Mr.Dhaval G. Nanavati, learned advocate waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent - Corporation.

2. By way of present petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the impugned action of the respondent - Corporation.

3. Mr.N. V. Gandhi, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner states on instruction that the petitioner - company, a partnership firm is ready and willing to pay a fine of Rs.25,000/- imposed by the Surat Municipal Corporation to similarly situated persons having godown and carrying out business of transport and is also ready to file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not carry out business of transport in the property in dispute which would create hindrance in the flow of Page 1 of 2 HC-NIC Page 1 of 2 Created On Thu Mar 17 03:04:50 IST 2016 C/SCA/1212/2016 ORDER traffic.

4. On the other hand, Mr.Dhaval Nanavati, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent - Corporation states that the petitioner had made illegal construction on the premises and the Corporation may be directed to take appropriate steps.

5. Considering the above aspects, I am of the opinion that the following order would meet the end of justice.

The petitioner shall pay fine of Rs.25,000/- to the respondent - Corporation. On depositing an amount of fine of Rs.25,000/- and on filing an undertaking, the respondent - Corporation shall open the seal from the premises forthwith. It would be open for the respondent - Corporation to take action in accordance with law.

6. With the above, the petition stands disposed of. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.

(A.J.DESAI, J.) vijay Page 2 of 2 HC-NIC Page 2 of 2 Created On Thu Mar 17 03:04:50 IST 2016