SCA/3220/2002 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 3220 of 2002 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 3225 of 2002 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 ? ========================================================= PRAGATI COOPERATIVE BANK LTD. - Petitioner(s) Versus GAUTAM DEVENDRA BHAGAT & 2 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MRS KETTY A MEHTA for Petitioner(s) : 1, None for Respondent(s) : 1, RULE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3,1.2.4 - 2. MR BHARAT JANI for Respondent(s) : 3, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL Date : 07/05/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. The present petitions are against the interim order passed by the tribunal below application exh. No. 6 in appeal No. 784 of 2001 as well as SCA/3220/2002 2/3 JUDGMENT appeal No. 868 of 2001. 2. This Court on 28.6.2002 had passed the following order: “1. Rule. By way of ad-interim relief, it is directed that, the award shall remain stayed if, the appellant before the Tribunal, deposits 50% amount of the award within 2 months from today. 2. It is clerified that, the pendency of the petition shall not preclude the either side from moving early hearing of the appeal before the Tribunal. 3. After the appeal is decided by the Tribunal, it will be open to the either side to move this Court for final hearing of these matters.” 3. Today, when the matters are taken up for final hearing, the learned Counsel for the petitioner places on record the final order passed by the tribunal in aforesaid both the appeals, whereby the appeals are dismissed. 4. Under these circumstances, the challenge against interim order would not survive and the petitions have become infructuous. 5. Disposed of accordingly. Rule discharged. IR is vacated. (JAYANT PATEL, J.) Suresh* SCA/3220/2002 3/3 JUDGMENT