SCA/23751/2006 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 23751 of 2006 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MD SHAH ========================================================= 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 ? ========================================================= INDOCEM INDUSTRIES THRO.P.O.A.SHANTIBAHI C SHAH - Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & 1 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR RAVINDRA SHAH for Petitioner(s) : 1,MRS KANAN R SHAH for Petitioner(s) : 1, MR LR PUJARI GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent(s) : 1, NOTICE SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 1 - 2. ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MD SHAH Date : 28/01/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1.0 Heard. The remedy is available to the SCA/23751/2006 2/3 JUDGMENT petitioner to file an appeal before respondent No.2 under Section 53(1) of the Bombay Stamp Act against the impugned order passed by respondent No.1. Instead of preferring an appeal before respondent No.2 under Section 53A of the Bombay Stamp Act, the petitioner has directly challenged the impugned order passed by respondent No.1 before this Court. 2.0 It is submitted by Mr. Pujari, learned APP that if an appeal will be preferred under Section 53 of the Bombay Stamp Act, then it will be decided by respondent No.2 on merits. 3.0 In view of the above, the petitioner is at liberty to challenge the impugned order passed by respondent No.1 before respondent No.2. If an appeal will be preferred by the petitioner under Section 53(1) of the Bombay Stamp Act, it will be considered as it is filed in time and without going into the point of limitation, respondent No.2 will decide the same on merits, after giving SCA/23751/2006 3/3 JUDGMENT full opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The petitioner is at liberty to place all the material which he is having and the appellate Authority will consider and decide the same on merits. 4.0 With the above directions, the petition stands disposed of. Notice is discharged. (M.D. Shah,J.) Umesh/