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

SANDEEP N. BHATT
Dineshbhai Khimjibhai Patel – Appellant
Versus
Pareshbhai Devilal Sankhesara – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
In Special Civil Application No.4725/2021:
For the Petitioner No.1:Mr. Ambrish V. Jani (8674), Advocate
For the Respondent No.1:Mr. AA Zabuawala for Ms. Naynavati S. Jethva (10030), Advocate
For the Respondent Nos.2, 3, 4: Notice Served
In Special Civil Application No.4681/2021:
For the Petitioner No.1:Mr. Ambrish V Jani (8674), Advocate
For the Respondent Nos.1, 3: Notice Served
For the Respondent Nos.2, 4:Mr. DA Sankhesara, Advocate
In Special Civil Application No.4680/2021:
For the Petitioner No.1:Mr. Ambrish V Jani (8674), Advocate
For the Respondent Nos.1, 3: Notice Served
For the Respondent Nos.2, 4:Mr. DA Sankhesara, Advocate
In Special Civil Application No.3245/2021:
For the Petitioner No.1:Mr. DA Sankhesara, Advocate
For the Respondent No.1:Mr. Romesh C Niven, Advocate
For the Respondent No.2:Mr. Ambrish V Jani, Advocate
In Special Civil Application No.8524/2020:
For the Petitioner No.1:Mr. DA Sankhesara, Advocate
For the Respondent No.1:Mr. Romesh C Niven, Advocate
For the Respondent No.2:Mr. Ambrish V Jani, Advocate
For the Respondent No.2:Mr. Rushiraj J Shastri, Advocate
In Special Civil Application No.8526/2020:
For the Petitioner No.1:Mr. DA Sankhesara, Advocate
For the Respondent No.1:Ms. Niyati V Vaishnav, Advocate
For the Respondent No.2:Mr. Ambrish V Jani, Advocate
For the Respondent No.2:Mr. Rushiraj J Shastri, Advocate
In Special Civil Application No.8861/2020:
For the Petitioner No.1:Mr. DA Sankhesara, Advocate
For the Respondent No.1:Mr. Romesh C Niven, Advocate
For the Respondent No.2:Mr. Ambrish V Jani, Advocate
For the Respondent No.2:Mr. Rushiraj J Shastri, Advocate

JUDGMENT (COMMON ORAL)

By way of these petitions, the petitioners-original defendants seek to challenge the orders passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Sabarkantha-Idar below the applications for leave to defend in respective Special Summary Suits filed by the original plaintiffs, whereby the direction to deposit 50% of the suit amount has been imposed upon the defendants-petitioners, as a condition to defend the suit.

2. At the joint request of learned advocates for the parties, all these petitions are being disposed of finally by this common oral judgment, as common question of law and facts are involved in all these petitions.

3. Rule. Respective learned advocates waive service of notice of rule in respective petitions.

4. The partnership firm and the partners therein have filed the petitions herein. For the sake of convenience, the facts of Special Civil Application No.4725 of 2021 are referred to, which are as under:—

4.1 The original plaintiff filed summary proceedings under Order 37 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as ‘CPC’ for short) before the learned Principal Senior Civil Court, Idar seeking the decree for the amount mentioned in eac

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