SCA/21690/2005 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 21690 of 2005 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? ========================================================= HOMIBHAI NARIMAN KELAWALLA - Petitioner(s) Versus SURAT MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & 2 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR RR MARSHALL for Petitioner(s) : 1, DS AFF.NOT FILED (N) for Respondent(s) : 1 - 3. MR PRASHANT G DESAI for Respondent(s) : 1, MR AMIT PATEL, ASST. GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent(s) : 2, MR PV HATHI for Respondent(s) : 3, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH Date : 17/12/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. By way of this petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner – original plaintiff has prayed for an appropriate writ, direction and/or order quashing and setting SCA/21690/2005 2/3 JUDGMENT aside the judgment and order dated 10.10.2001 passed by the learned 6th Joint Civil Judge (JD), Surat passed below Exh.5 in Regular Civil Suit No. 395 of 1999 as well as judgment and order dated 19.09.2005 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, 4th Fast Track Court, Surat in Misc.Civil Application No.211 of 2002 in not granting interim relief as prayed for in favour of the petitioner – plaintiff. 2. It is required to be noted that by order dated 25.10.2005 while issuing notice, learned Single Judge has passed an order directing the parties to maintain status-quo which is continued till date. Even otherwise, it appears that if during the pendency of proceedings if respondent no.3 is permitted to put up any construction then entire suit would become infructuous. Under the circumstances, the parties are required to maintain status-quo. Under the circumstances, impugned order passed by both the Courts below are quashed and set aside. The parties are directed to maintain status-quo and ad- interim relief granted earlier is directed to continue till final disposal of the suit. Considering the fact that suit is of 1999, the learned trial Court is directed to decide and dispose of the suit as expeditiously as possible but not later than 31st December, 2009. All concerned are directed to cooperate the learned Trial Court in early disposal of the Suit. It goes without saying that the learned trial Court to decide and dispose of the suit in accordance with law and on merits without in any way SCA/21690/2005 3/3 JUDGMENT being influenced by the present order. Rule is made absolute accordingly. Direct service is permitted. [M.R.Shah,J.] satish