AO/46/2007 1/4 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD APPEAL FROM ORDER No. 46 of 2007 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? NO 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? NO 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? NO 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 ? NO 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? NO ========================================================= NITINBHAI MANIBHAI PATEL - Appellant(s) Versus DHIRUBHAI RAVJIBHAI PATEL & 1 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR SAURABH PATEL for Appellant(s) : 1, 1.2.2,1.2.6 MR MA BUKHARI for Appellant(s) : 1.2.1, 1.2.3, 1.2.4, 1.2.5, 1.2.7,1.2.8 MR NILESH A PANDYA for Respondent(s) : 1 - 2. ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH Date : 28/08/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. Heard Shri Saurabh Patel, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellants and Shri Nilesh Pandya, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the AO/46/2007 2/4 JUDGMENT respondents. 2. What is challenged in the appeal from order by the appellants-original defendants is the order passed by the learned trial court passed below Exh.5 dated 18.12.2006 passed in Special Civil Suit No.142 of 2006 partly allowing the application Exh.5 directing both the parties to maintain status-quo in respect of the suit property till the final disposal of the suit. 3. At the outset it is required to be noted that while admitting the present appeal from order and in Civil Application No.1656 of 2007 the learned Single Judge while allowing the said civil application has granted the interim relief in terms of paragraph 4(b). Meaning thereby, the order passed by the learned trial court passed below Exh.5 is stayed and thus the status-quo order has been vacated. 4. Under the circumstances, Shri Nilesh Pandya, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents-original plaintiffs has submitted that in AO/46/2007 3/4 JUDGMENT view of the same as such the appeal from order is already virtually allowed at that stage and the same may be continued till the final disposal of the suit and the suit be expedited. 5. Considering the above and in view of the order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 20.6.2007 passed in Civil Application No.1656 of 2007 staying the further implementation of the order passed by the learned trial court passed below Exh.5 dated 18.12.2006 passed in Special Civil Suit No.142 of 2006, it appears that there is no order of status-quo during the pendency of the suit as directed by the learned trial court. Under the circumstances, the same position be continued. Meaning thereby, the interim order passed by this Court shall be continued till the final disposal of the suit. Meaning thereby there shall not be any order of status-quo till the final disposal of the suit. 6. In view of the same, the appeal from order is allowed to the aforesaid extent and the impugned order passed by the learned trial court passed AO/46/2007 4/4 JUDGMENT below Exh.5 dated 18.12.2006 passed in Special Civil Suit No.142 of 2006 is quashed and set aside. It will be open for the respective parties to move an appropriate application before the learned trial court for expeditious hearing of the suit, and as and when such an application is made, the learned trial court to consider the same and decide and dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible and in accordance with law and on merits and without being influenced by the order passed by the learned trial court passed below Exh.5 as well as the present order, and any observations made by the learned trial court passed below Exh.5 shall be treated tentatively and while deciding the application Exh.5 only. 7. With these, appeal from order is allowed to the aforesaid extent. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. ( M.R. SHAH, J. ) syed/