SCA/311020/2005 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 3110 of 2005 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL ========================================================= 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 ? ========================================================= PAN PIPES RESPLENTANTS LTD THROUGH SUNDERLAL PARIKH - Petitioner(s) Versus VYAPAR VIKAS CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR SHIRISH JOSHI for Petitioner(s) : 1, NOTICE SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 1, MR NK MAJMUDAR for Respondent(s) : 1, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL Date : 28/11/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. When the matter is taken up for final hearing, Mr. Joshi learned Counsel appearing for the SCA/311020/2005 2/3 JUDGMENT petitioner states that as per his client, the reference under Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as ('SICA Act') was pending on the date, when the earlier appeal/revision was decided, and also on the date, when the review application was heard and is pending, even as on now. However, he states that as the tribunal is yet to decide all the question of merits, and as revision is to be heard by the tribunal, the petitioner is not pressing this petition at this stage. 1. Mr. Majmudar learned Counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that tribunal may be directed to decide the revision application within some reasonable time. 2. Under these circumstances, the petition is disposed of as not pressed. Rule is discharged. IR, if any, is vacated. 3. It is observed that tribunal shall make an attempt to dispose of revision as early as possible, preferably within a period of six months from the receipt of the order. SCA/311020/2005 3/3 JUDGMENT 4. It would be open to both the sides, to raise contention as available in law including provisions of Section 22 of the SICA Act. (JAYANT PATEL, J.) Suresh*