Dismissed

Naginbhai Keshavbhai Vandar v. Paschim Gujarat Vij Company Ltd. (Formerly Known as Gujarat

Gujarat HC10 Sept 2026FA/652/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad dismissed a first appeal for non-prosecution. The court granted the appellant's request to withdraw appearance but exercised powers under Order 47 Rule 17 CPC to dismiss the appeal because the appellant failed to replace their lawyer despite knowing the pendency.

What did the court decide?

The appeal stands dismissed on the ground of non-prosecution under Order 47 Rule 17 CPC.

Naginbhai Keshavbhai Vandar Vs Paschim… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Gujarat HC (2026)

¶1

C/FA/652/2013 (GJHC240389062013) ORDER DATED: 10/09/2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶3

R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 652 of 2013

¶4

========================================================== NAGINBHAI KESHAVBHAI VANDAR

¶5

Versus

¶6

PASCHIM GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LTD (FORMERLY KNOWN AS GUJARAT & ANR.

¶7

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

¶8

Appearance:

¶9

MR HARSHIT S TOLIA(2708) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MR PARTH S TOLIA(5617) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MR RITURAJ M MEENA(3224) for the Defendant(s) No. 1 RULE NOT RECD BACK for the Defendant(s) No. 2

¶10

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

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI

¶12

Date : 10/09/2026

¶13

ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA)

¶14

Mr. .Parth Tolia, learned advocate is tendering the correspondence of prior intimation given to the appellant for withdrawal of their appearance and same is taken on record.

¶15

This First Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed in Special Civil Suit No. 14 of 2008, whereby, the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Veraval, by allowing the money suit filed by the respondents, directed the appellant to pay the decreetal amount along with the interest.

¶16

Mr. Parth Tolia, learned advocate taking basis of the intimation, as produced, requested this Court to permit the advocate on record as well as the others to withdraw their appearance for and on behalf

¶17

Page 1 of 2

¶18

C/FA/652/2013 (GJHC240389062013) ORDER DATED: 10/09/2026

¶19

of the appellant. The permission as sought is granted.

¶20

Having regard to the facts of the case and intimation given by the counsel to the appellant, we do not deem it fit to issue advocate notice on the appellant. The appellant – original defendant no. 2 is aware about the pendency of the appeal and despite of this, he has not cared to replace the advocate.

¶21

Thus, by exercising our powers under Order 47 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the appeal is ordered to be dismissed on the ground of non-prosecution. Accordingly, appeal stands dismiss.

¶22

(ILESH J. VORA,J)

¶23

(R. T. VACHHANI, J)

¶24

P.S. JOSHI

¶25

Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judges. Digitally signed by: PALLAV SUBHASHCHANDRA JOSHI(HC00177), Principal Pvt. Secretary, at High Court of Gujarat on 10/09/2026 17:01:34

¶26

Page 2 of 2

Naginbhai Keshavbhai Vandar v. Paschim Gujarat Vij Company Ltd. (Formerly Known as Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naginbhai Keshavbhai Vandar v. Paschim Gujarat Vij Company Ltd. (Formerly Known as Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases