AO/61/2008 1/4 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD APPEAL FROM ORDER No. 61 of 2008 With CIVIL APPLICATION No. 2294 of 2008 In APPEAL FROM ORDER No. 61 of 2008 With CIVIL APPLICATION No. 3189 of 2008 In APPEAL FROM ORDER No. 61 of 2008 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH ========================================================= 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 ? ========================================================= KESHUBHAI MOHANBHAI PATEL - Appellant(s) Versus PADMABEN @ RENUBEN RATILAL GANDABHAI BACHKANIWALA & 28 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR MEHUL SHARAD SHAH for Appellant(s) : 1, MR RM CHHAYA for Respondent(s) : 1, NOTICE SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 2, 4, 9,11 - 14, 16, 20, 22,24 - 25, 28, MR DC DAVE for Respondent(s) : 3, 5, 10, 15, 17, 21, None for Respondent(s) : 6 - 8,18 - 19, 23, - for Respondent(s) : 0.0.0, 0.0.0,0.0.0 ========================================================= AO/61/2008 2/4 JUDGMENT CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH Date : 28/08/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. Present Appeal From Order is filed by the appellant – original defendant No.1 challenging the ex-parte ad- interim injunction granted by the trial court while passing order below application Ex.5. 2. Heard the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respective parties. 3. It is reported that hearing of the application Ex.5 is fixed by the learned trial court on 30/8/2008. It is also reported that even the appellant - original defendant No.1 has also filed reply to the application Ex.5. 4. Mr.Mehul Sharad Shah, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant – original defendant No.1 has submitted that there are more than 25 defendants, who are family members of the plaintiffs and hearing of the application Ex.5 will be further delayed on the ground that some of the defendants are not served. 5. Mr.R.M. Chhaya, learned advocate appearing on behalf of AO/61/2008 3/4 JUDGMENT the respondent No.1 - original plaintiff has submitted and stated at bar that the original plaintiff shall not pray for any adjournment and/or shall not request to defer the hearing of the application Ex.5 on the ground that some of the defendants are not served and/or on any other ground. Mr.Chhaya has also further submitted that the original plaintiff was/is ready to proceed with the hearing of the application Ex.5 on any date which may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court. 6. Without expressing any opinion on merits whether the learned trial court was justified in granting such an ad- interim injunction without issuing any notice, as the hearing of the application Ex.5 is fixed on 30/8/2008 and even the appellant – original defendant No.1, who can be said to be the main contesting party, has filed reply to the injunction application, present Appeal From Order is not entertained at this stage, as any observations made in the present Appeal From Order would affect the rights of either parties. 7. In view of the above, present Appeal From Order is disposed of at this stage directing the trial court to hear the application application Ex.5 on day-to-day basis from 30/8/2008 and decide and dispose of the said application AO/61/2008 4/4 JUDGMENT Ex.5 on or before 15/9/2008 under intimation to this Court without fail. It will be open for the appellant herein – original defendant No.1 to raise all the contentions including the contentions raised in this proceedings, before the trial court at the time of hearing of application Ex.5 and the same shall be considered and dealt with by the trial court while deciding application Ex.5. It is made clear that this court has not expressed any opinion on merits in favour of either parties and even against the appellant – original defendant No.1 and it is ultimately for the learned trial court to decide and dispose of the application Ex.5 in accordance with law and on merits as aforesaid, without in any way being influenced by the present order. 8. With the observations and directions aforesaid, the Appeal From Order stands disposed of. In view of disposal of the Appeal From Order, no orders in both the Civil Applications. No costs. D.S. Permitted by 29/8/2008. Copy of this order be also given the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respective parties, to produce it before the trial court. [M.R. SHAH, J.] rafik