Gujarat High Court
SCA/7369/1999 of KAILASHBEN BECHARSINGH VEGHELA Vs HARSHADSINGH MANUSINGH CHHAVDA on 17 December 2002
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 7369 of 1999 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO to see the judgements? 2. To be referred to
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 7369 of 1999
For Approval and Signature:
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL
============================================================
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 judgements?
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?
-------------------------------------------------------------- KAILASHBEN BECHARSINGH VEGHELAVersus HARSHADSINGH MANUSINGH CHHAVDA -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance:
1. Special Civil Application No. 7369 of 1999 MS NEENA R AGRAWAL for Petitioner No. 1 MS BANNA S DUTTA for Respondent No. 1
-------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL
Date of decision: 17/12/2002
ORAL JUDGEMENT
present on behalf of petitioner. Today also when the matter is called out the petitioner nor the advocate for the petitioner-Ms.Neena Agrawal is present.
2. The learned counsel for respondent Ms.Banna Dutta has filed a note stating that the parties have compromised the matter and therefore the petition has become infructuous.
3. In view of the note filed by the learned counsel for the respondent the petition is disposed of having become infructuous. Rule is discharged. There shall be no order as to costs. Liberty to apply in case of difficulty.
17.12.2002����(JAYANT PATEL,J)