IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD FIRST APPEAL No 634 of 1984 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE KSHITIJ R.VYAS and Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO to see the judgement? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? : NO 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : NO of the judgement? 4. Whether this case involves a substantial question : NO 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 concerned : NO Magistrate/Magistrates,Judge/Judges,Tribunal/Tribunals? -------------------------------------------------------------- HUKAMCHAND MILLS LTD Versus CR TULSIDAS -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR AC GANDHI for appellant RULE SERVED for Respondent No. 1-2 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE KSHITIJ R.VYAS and MR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD Date of Order: 07/10/2002 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : MR.JUSTICE KSHITIJ R.VYAS) Learned Counsel for the appellant Company States that the appellant Company has been ordered to be wound up by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, by its order dated 20th July 2001 in Company Petition No. 35 of 2000. He further states that respondent No.1 Firm, i.e. original plaintiff has also closed down, which is also clear from the endorsement made by the Bailiff while trying to serve the said respondent. In view of this, learned Counsel for the appellant states that the appeal has become infructuous. Therefore, we dispose of this appeal as having become infructuous. No order as to costs. (Kshitij R. Vyas, J.) (H.K. Rathod, J.) Sreeram.