Dismissed

Interlink Petroleum Ltd. v. Vinayakrao S Desai

Gujarat HC25 Jan 2021SCA/9713/1999

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a special civil application for want of prosecution. The petitioners' advocate filed a 'no instructions' order, no appearance was made on their behalf, and service of notice to the petitioner's registered address showed the office was defunct. The case was closed and the record returned to the lower court.

What did the court decide?

Funny? held that the petition stands dismissed for want of prosecution, notice is discharged, and interim relief stands vacated.

Interlink Petroleum Ltd. Vs Vinayakrao S Desai — Writ and Judicial Review | Gujarat HC (2021)

¶1

C/SCA/9713/1999 ORDER

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶3

R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9713 of 1999

¶4

================================================================ INTERLINK PETROLEUM LTD & 1 other(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

VINAYAKRAO S DESAI & 1 other(s)

¶7

===============================================================

¶8

Appearance:

¶9

ADVOCATE NOTICE UNSERVED(82) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2 MR BHARAT JANI(352) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2 LAW OFFICER BRANCH(420) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 MR MEHUL S SHAH(772) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 MR VS DESAI(1398) for the Respondent(s) No. 1

¶10

================================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A. P. THAKER

¶12

Date : 25/01/2021

¶13

ORAL ORDER

¶14

When the matter is taken up for hearing, none has appeared on behalf of the petitioners. Mr.Vinayakrao S. Desai, party-in-person is present through video conferencing.

¶15

It is required to be noted that today, party-in-person has silence day and, therefore, he is unable to speak.

¶16

It appears from the record that the learned advocate for the petitioners has filed “no instructions purshish”. In that view of the matter, on 09.01.2020, the Coordinate Bench of this Court has passed the following order.

¶17

“ Learned advocate Mr.Bharat Jani has tendered a pursis indicating that the petitioner company since long is not instructing and, therefore, he is no more interested to appear on behalf of the petitioner company. Consequently, issue advocate notice, returnable on 12.02.2020.”

¶18

Page 1 of 2

¶19

C/SCA/9713/1999 ORDER

¶20

In view of the said order, the notice was served upon registered address of the petitioner company. However, as per the endorsement, it appears that the office of the petitioners is not there and some other company is functioning there. Except, the address mentioned in the petition, no other address is available on record.

¶21

In view of the above, the petition stands dismissed for want of prosecution. Notice is discharged. Interim relief, if any, granted earlier stands vacated forthwith. Record and proceedings be sent back to the concerned Trial Court.

¶22

(DR. A. P. THAKER, J)

¶23

V.R. PANCHAL

¶24

Page 2 of 2

Interlink Petroleum Ltd. v. Vinayakrao S Desai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Interlink Petroleum Ltd. v. Vinayakrao S Desai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ritesh Chimanbhai Mer Vs State of Gujarat

Hiru @ Hiriyo Jetubhai Vaskeliya Vs State of Gujarat

Sureshbhai @ Susho Somabhai Nayak Vs State of Gujarat

Patel Kashiben Wd/O Ramabhai Chaganlal Thro'Her Heirs Vs Bank of Baroda

Uday Builders Vs Gujarat Industrial Developmentcorporation

Cema Electric Lighting Products India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Bhaven T.Patel