SCA/17466/2006 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 17466 of 2006 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. 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? ========================================================= KADIWAR MOHMAD AMIBHAI & 2 - Petitioner(s) Versus BHATI MOTINAH HIRANATH THR' POA HOLDER & 80 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR MEHUL S SHAH for Petitioner(s) : 1 - 3.MR SURESH M SHAH for Petitioner(s) : 1 - 3. None for Respondent(s) : 1 - 18,20 - 81. MR DP JOSHI for Respondent(s) : 19, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH Date : 03/12/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. Heard Mr.Mehul S.Shah, learned Advocate for the petitioners and Mr.D.P.Joshi, learned Advocate for the respondents. SCA/17466/2006 2/3 JUDGMENT 2. At the outset, Mr.Mehul S.Shah, learned Advocate for the petitioners has submitted that in view of subsequent development and as construction is already put up on the land in question, he does not press present Special Civil Application qua impugned orders passed by both the Courts below refusing to grant injunction in favour of the petitioners and against respondents restraining them from putting up construction on the land in question. However, he has requested to consider the impugned order with respect to costs imposed by the learned Appellate Court while dismissing the appeal which comes to Rs.81,000/-. 3. Mr.Joshi, learned Advocate for the respondents has submitted that in the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the fact that respondents are coming from very lower strata of the society and are very poor and they were harassed, atleast token cost be awarded and he has left it to the Court, amount of costs to be awarded. Mr.Mehul S.Shah, learned Advocate for the petitioners has also left it to discretion of the Court, amount of costs to be awarded. In view of above and in the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the opinion that if amount of cost is reduced to Rs.5000/- in all, it will meet the ends of justice. 4. Under the circumstances and for the reasons stated above, present Special Civil Application is partly allowed and the impugned order dated 22.02.2006 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, SCA/17466/2006 3/3 JUDGMENT Fast Track Court, Morbi in Civil Misc.Appeal No.3 of 2006 is modified with respect to awarding cost of Rs.81,000/- and same is reduced to Rs.5000/- in all which the petitioners are directed to deposit with the learned trial Court within a period of three weeks from today and on such deposit, respondent No.19 herein be permitted to withdraw the same for himself and on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 79. Special Civil Application qua other reliefs is dismissed as not pressed. Rule is made absolute accordingly to the aforesaid extent. [M.R.Shah,J.] satish