LPA/73/2001 1/4 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No. 73 of 2001 In SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 9585 of 1999 With CIVIL APPLICATION No. 1355 of 2001 In LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No. 73 of 2001 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.BRAHMBHATT ========================================================= 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 ? ========================================================= NEBROS PHARMACEUTICALS PVT LTD - Appellant Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & 3 - Respondents ========================================================= Appearance : MR BD KARIA for Appellant: 1, MR PD BHATE AGP for Respondents : 1 - 2. MS SEJAL K MANDAVIA for Respondents : 1,3 - 4. ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD and LPA/73/2001 2/4 JUDGMENT HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.BRAHMBHATT Date : 07/08/2008 COMMON ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD) 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The case as set out in the Special Civil Application was that the petitioner has purchased the sick unit. In the sick unit a huge amount of money was invested by petitioner. Therefore, his unit should be considered to be a new unit because he was operating it as new owner. He led to us the Circular of the Government dated 18th April, 1961, which provides for exemption. In this circular, it has been clearly stated under what circumstances the units would be considered as New Industries. In para-5 of the Circular reads as under: “Para-5 : The expansion : Any expansion shall for the purpose of exemption of Octroi be deemed to be new Industry to the extent of expansion only. No exemption shall be given for the replacement of machinery, overhaulting extent of the existing industry.” 3. The case of the petitioner is that he has purchased the said sick unit, then did expansion. 4. The said unit does not come within the ambit of definition of new unit of the circular dated 18th LPA/73/2001 3/4 JUDGMENT April, 1961. This circular dated 18th April, 1961 provides that the exemption is to be granted to the new industries only and not to the old industries or industries already established. In clause 5, it also provides exemption for expansion. 5. No case was made out by the appellant-petitioner for any expansion. The principle case set out by counsel for the petitioner was for New Industry, it was negatived by the learned Single Judge. That being the position, we do not consider any interference is called for as the case of the petitioner would not fall under the circular of the Government dated 18th April, 1961. It was not a New Industry at all. It was an unit, where expansion took place, was not pleaded before the authorities and even in the writ petition. Thus it is evident, this case of expansion was not initially set up, only prayer was in the shape of new unit. 6. We do not think any relief can be granted. Accordingly, the appeal deserves no merit. No interference is warranted in the order of the learned Single Judge. Letters Patent Appeal is accordingly dismissed. Interim relief stands vacated. 7. In view of the order passed in Letters Patent Appeal, Civil Application is disposed of accordingly. [ BHAGWATI PRASAD, J.] LPA/73/2001 4/4 JUDGMENT [ S.R. BRAHMBHATT, J.] pallav