IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION No 1240 of 1995 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE M.S.PARIKH ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgements? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgement? 4. Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder? 5. Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? -------------------------------------------------------------- STATE OF GUJARAT Versus BHARAT SHANTIBHAI SHAH -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MS BINODA GAJJAR, AGP for Petitioner MR BD KARIA for Respondent No. 1 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE M.S.PARIKH Date of decision: 09/07/97 ORAL JUDGEMENT 1. Rule. Service of rule waived by Mr. B.D. Karia, learned advocate for the respondent. 2. Heard. The order impugned in this Civil Revision Application u/S. 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure is one rendered by the learned Assistant Judge, Bhavnagar on 20/12/1994 in Misc. Civil Appeal No. 62 of 1994. I have gone through the judgment of the learned Appellate Judge. He has focussed his attention upon the three instances given by the respondent for showing his prima-facie case with regard to discriminatory treatment which he alleged to have received at the hands of the appellant. Thelearned Appellate Judge has found on appreciation of the material that there is a prima-facie case for the respondent to go to trial and, therefore, he has accepted interim injunction application exh. 5. The trial Court merely focussed its attention only on the question of jurisdiction by saying that it would be only the High Court that would be able to decide the question of discrimination. The three instances which have been cited by the respondent in the facts of the case would positively require evidence to be recorded and that precisely would be done by a Civil Court. As a matter of fact this Court will not go into the disputed questions of facts. Hence, this Revision Application is not required to be entertained. However, at the request of the learned Assistant Government Pleader following direction is issued :- The learned trial Judge will hear the suit and decide the same as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of writ of this direction. Subject to aforesaid direction, rule is discharged. No order as to cost. * * *