SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1986 Supreme(Guj) 99

A.P.RAVANI
PATEL MAGANLAL DHANJIBHAI GODHASARA – Appellant
Versus
PATEL LAXMIDAS NARANBHAI KANSAGARA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: D.U.SHAH, SURESH M.SHAH

A. P. RAVANI, J.

( 1 ) IN case a lawyer files no-instruction purshis and request the Court to permit him to withdraw from the case should the Court straight away accept the request and permit the advocate to withdraw from the case and thereafter should the Court proceed further in absence of the litigant? These are the questions which have arisen in this revision application challenging the legality and validity of the order refusing to condone the delay in filing an application to set aside an ex parte decree.

( 2 ) THE petitioners are original defendants against whom the respondent-original plaintiff filed a suit Inter alia praying that he was the owner of the suit property i. e. land admeasuring 11 acres and 23 gunthas bearing Survey No. 663 of village Supadi Taluka Dhoraji District Rajkot. The plaintiff also prayed for possession of the suit property. It appears that the case of the plaintiff was that he had purchased the suit land for a consideration of Rs. 5 0 by sale deed dated 5/04/1971 The defendants appeared in the suit and resisted the same inter alia contending that in fact it was not a sale transaction but it was a money-lending transaction. After issues were framed the













Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top