ORDER BELOW Exh
Order below Exh. 1 in
Sp. Smr. St. No. 49 of 2003
IN THE COURT OF PRINCIPAL SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE
AT GANDHINAGAR
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Order below Exh. 1
in
Special Summary Suit No. 49 of 2003
====================================================
1. It appears from the record and proceeding that this summary suit is
filed in the year January, 2013 but as the defendant had not filed leave
to defend application against summons for judgment, the suit of plaintiff
came to be decreed and defendant was ordered to pay Rs.3,85,064/-
alongwith interest as prayed for.
2. However, such decree challenged before the Hon'ble High Court of
Gujarat vide Special Civil Application No. 3000/2006 and this fact is
envisaged by an application produced at Exh. 20 as well as order of
Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat vide mark 22/2. It further appears that
the Hon'ble High Court had set aside ex-parte decree passed by this
court previously and restored this very suit on the file of this particular
court.
3. It transpires from the court notice, produced on record vide Exh. A,
Exh. 25, Exh. B, Exh. 26 and Exh. C that even after issuance of such
notice, the report of bailiff clearly discloses that it has not been served
upon defendant on ground that defendant company has been closed for
last seven years and some other company is proceeding its work there.
The notice upon the advocate of defendant has also returned unserved
with the report of bailiff that learned advocate of defendant i.e. Mr.
Dhiren M. Raval has expired. The notice upon learned advocate of
Principal Senior Civil Judge
Gandhinagar
1/2
Order below Exh. 1 in
Sp. Smr. St. No. 49 of 2003
plaintiff has been served properly since long as well as in the year
April, 2017. The record clearly shows that inspite of service of notice,
nobody remained present before the court till today. Defendant
company is not working their at the address shown in the cause title of
the plaint. The plaintiff company has not made any clarification or
submitted new address of defendant company. Therefore, in view of the
discussion made hereinabove, the plaintiff poorly failed to proceed with
the matter after its restoration and therefore the suit of plaintiff
company requires to be dismissed and dismissed accordingly by
passing following order.
ORDER
1. The suit of plaintiff bearing Special Summary Suit No. 49 of 2003 is
hereby dismissed for want of prosecution.
Order singed and pronounced in the open Court today on
this the 23rd Day of January, 2018.
Place: Gandhinagar (Chaitanya R. Barot)
Date : 23.01.2018 GJ00352
Principal Senior Civil Judge
Gandhinagar.
Dhiman/GNR
Principal Senior Civil Judge
Gandhinagar
2/2
|