IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No 381 of 1989 in Special Civil Application No. 1312 of 1989 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE J.M.PANCHAL and MR.JUSTICE A.M.KAPADIA ============================================================ 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 -------------------------------------------------------------- GSFC Versus HARISIDHI PLASTIC INDUSTRIES -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: 1. LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No. 381 of 1989 MR RP BHATT for Appellants MR ND NANAVATI for Respondent No. 1 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE J.M.PANCHAL and MR.JUSTICE A.M.KAPADIA Date of decision: 08/02/2000 ORAL JUDGEMENT (Per J.M. Panchal, J.): 1. This appeal which is filed under clause 15 of the Letters Patent is directed against the order dated October 24, 1989 rendered by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No. 1312 of 1989 by which the appellants were directed to grant appropriate loan amount to the respondent after taking proper security, including additional security if necessary, within one month of the order. 2. Learned counsel for the appellants states at the bar that the appellants had orally informed the learned counsel that the loan was sanctioned and pursuant to the settlement the amount due was also repaid to the appellants. 3. In view of this statement made at the bar, we are of the opinion that the appeal has become infructuous and deserves to be disposed of accordingly. Therefore the appeal fails and is dismissed as having become infructuous with no orders as to costs. 4. Liberty is reserved to the appellants to move the Court in case of necessity. ---