IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 7442 of 1999 with SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 7443 and 7444 of 1999 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE J.N.BHATT ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO to see the judgements? 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 Civil Judge? : NO -------------------------------------------------------------- INDRAVADAN MULJIBHAI PATEL Versus MIROLI PIYAT CO OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR PS CHAMPANERI for Petitioner MR VIJAY H PATEL for Respondent No. 1 MR YF MEHTA for Respondent No. 2 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE J.N.BHATT Date of decision: 07/03/2000 ORAL JUDGEMENT In this group of three matters, virtually common questions are involved, and therefore, they are being disposed of by this common judgment, upon request. The petitions are against the interim order of Gujarat State Co-operative Tribunal arising out Lavad Suits. It has been stated at the Bar that those suits have now matured and at an advanced stage. The dispute on merits is pending in suits before the Registrar's Board of Nominees, Ahmedabad. It would be, therefore, expedient to direct for expeditious disposal of the suits on merits and dispose of this group of petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, against the interlocutory orders, which have now become final. Therefore, all these three petitions shall stand disposed of with a direction to the Registrar's Board of Nominees before whom Lavad Suits Nos.1137/99, 1138/99 and 1039/99 are pending, to expedite and decide them on merits. It is jointly submitted that direction may be given with a time-frame. Therefore, the Registrar's Board of Nominees is directed to decide the said Lavad suits as early as possible and preferably before the end of two months from the date of receipt of writ from this Court. Rule discharged. Interim relief stands vacated. ...... (vjn)