IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION No 125 of 1988 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE H.H.MEHTA ============================================================ 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 -------------------------------------------------------------- MAKBULNISA FADARUDDIN Versus SAIYED SADRUDDIN SAIYADALI -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MRS DT SHAH for Petitioner MR PV HATHI for Respondent No. 1 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE H.H.MEHTA Date of decision: 27/06/2000 ORAL JUDGEMENT Revision -petitioner is absent. Mrs.D.T.Shah, the learned advocate for the revision -petitioner is present. Ms. Khyati Hathi, the learned advocate for the revision opponent is present. Mrs. D.T.Shah has made a statement at the Bar that she has no instructions from the revision -petitioner to proceed further in the matter, and as the revision -petitioner is now no more interested to prosecute this case further, and therefore, this matter be disposed of accordingly. In view of the statement made by Mrs. D.T.Shah, the learned advocate for the revision -petitioner, this Civil Revision Application deserves to be disposed of and it is disposed of accordingly. Rule is discharged, with no order as to costs. Date: 27/6/2000. (H.H.MEHTA, J.) ccshah