Gujarat High Court
CRA/757/2001 of HUSENBHAI @ USHALUDDIN IBRAHIMBHAI Vs LEGAL HEIRS AND REP. OF DECD. RAMBHAI DUDABHAI on 21 December 2002
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION No 757 of 2001 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE P.B.MAJMUDAR ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION No 757 of 2001
For Approval and Signature:
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE P.B.MAJMUDAR
============================================================
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO
to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? : NO
3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : NO
of the judgement?
4. Whether this case involves a substantial question : NO
of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder?
5. Whether it is to be circulated to the concerned : NO Magistrate/Magistrates,Judge/Judges,Tribunal/Tribunals?
-------------------------------------------------------------- HUSENBHAI @ USHALUDDIN IBRAHIMBHAI
Versus
LEGAL HEIRS AND REP. OF DECD. RAMBHAI DUDABHAI
-------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR YATIN SONI for the Petitioner.
.......... for Respondent No. 1
DS AFF.NOT FILED (R) for Respondent No. 1/1-1/5,2,3
MS MEGHA JANI for Respondent No. 2
-------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE P.B.MAJMUDAR
Date of decision: 21/12/2002
ORAL JUDGEMENT
In view of the reasoning of the District Judge at page 8 of the impugned order, this revision application deserves to be dismissed in limine. Hence, rejected. Rule is discharged. Interim relief is vacated. No costs.
21st December, 2002 ( P.B. Majmudar, J. )
****
(apj)