LPA/44619/1996 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No. 446 of 1996 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER ================================================= 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 ? ================================================= THAKORE SITAJI MOHANJI & 1 - Appellant(s) Versus DIST.REGISTRAR CO OP.SOCIETIES& DY.DIRECTOR & 2 - Respondent(s) ================================================= Appearance : NOTICE SERVED for Appellant(s) : 1 – 2. Ms.T.N. KACHCHI, AGP for resp. no.1 Mr.SARTHAK VYAS FOR Mr.PRAKASH K JANI for Respondent(s) : 3, NOTICE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 2, ================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER Date : 09/09/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI) The present appeal is filed on 23rd April 1996 being aggrieved of the judgement and order dated 26th March 1996 in Special Civil LPA/44619/1996 2/3 JUDGMENT Application No.1799 of 1996. The learned Single Judge dismissed the petition, discharged notice and vacated interim order. This Court [Coram: R.A. Mehta, Acting C.J. & C.K. Thakker, J. (as he then was)] issued notice on 3rd February 1997 returnable on 17th February 1997. After a couple of adjournments, on 9th April 1997, the Court passed the following order: “Heard the learned advocates for the parties. Appeal is admitted. Hearing is expedited.” 2. From the record, it transpires that an application being Civil Application No.4001 of 1996, was filed wherein the Court was pleased to pass the following order on 9th April 1997: “Heard Mr.Shah for the applicants, Mr.Jhaveri for resp. no.1 and Mr.Jani for resp. no.3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the interim relief as prayed for cannot be granted. This CA is, therefore, rejected.” 3. The learned advocate, who filed the Letters Patent Appeal is elevated to the Bench of this Court and therefore, the office issued notices to the appellants on 6th November 2006, to the effect that, “Take notice that the advocate Mr.Mukesh R. Shah engaged by you in the aforesaid Letters Patent Appeal No.446 of 1996 has been elevated to the bench of this High Court. Therefore, you are hereby informed to remain present before this Hon'ble Court personally or LPA/44619/1996 3/3 JUDGMENT by an advocate or by some one by law authorised to act for you, within one month from the date of service of this notice to you. If no appearance is made on your behalf, your advocate or by some one by law authorised to act for you, the Court will hear the said petition ex parte.” (emphasis supplied) The said notices are served on the appellants on 21st and 22nd November 2006. Despite service of the notices, the appellants chose not to cause any appearance before this court. The matter was taken up for hearing. Learned advocate Mr.Sarthak Vyas for Mr.P.K. Jani invited attention of the Court to the judgement and order dated 26th March 1996 passed by the learned Single Judge. On perusal of the same and on perusal of the contentions raised in the appeal, the Court finds no reason to interfere with the judgement and order dated 26th March 1996 passed by the learned Single Judge. 4. In the result, the Letters Patent Appeal fails and the same is dismissed. (RAVI R. TRIPATHI, J.) (K.M. THAKER, J.) karim