IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 9773 of 1993 For Approval and Signature: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.K.ABICHANDANI ============================================================ 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 concerned : NO Magistrate/Magistrates,Judge/Judges,Tribunal/Tribunals? -------------------------------------------------------------- HIMATBHAI PREMJIBHAI SAVANI Versus SUB REGISTRAR OF ASSURANCE -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: 1. Special Civil Application No. 9773 of 1993 MR MI HAVA for the Petitioner is absent. MR LR POOJARI, AGP for Respondent No. 1-3 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.K.ABICHANDANI Date of decision: 28/08/2003 ORAL JUDGEMENT The learned counsel for the respondents states that the petition has become infructuous, because, as per the instructions received by him from the office of the Deputy Collector under his letter dated 30th January, 2003, the petitioner had credited Rs. 41,380/- by cheque dated 28.6.'97, being 1/4th of the amount of Rs. 1,65,025/-, which was the deficit duty covered by the impugned notice, as a deposit amount and preferred an appeal before the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Ahmedabad, and that the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority has disposed of his appeal and made an order under Section 32-C of the Bombay Stamp Act, 1958, by which only the total amount of Rs. 15,750/- was ordered to be recovered and the remaining amount of Rs. 25,630/has been refunded to the applicant and his document has been handed over to him on 5th September, 1998. The learned counsel places a copy of the said letter dated 30th January, 2003 on the record of this petition. In view of the petitioner having already preferred an appeal against the impugned notice at Annexure:A and the appellate order having been passed by which the petitioner has been refunded the amount of Rs. 25,636/- out of the total amount of Rs. 41,380/- credited by him and has been handed over the document, the petition has become infructuous. Rule is, therefore, discharged with no order as to costs. [R.K. ABICHANDANI, J.] pirzada/-