Rajgor Manubhai Khodabhai vs. Talod Municipality
AI Summary
Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order
Order Issued After Hearing
Purpose:
Mention Memo
Before:
Hon'ble Vineet Saran, Hon'ble J.K. Maheshwari
Stage:
FRESH (FOR ADMISSION) - CIVIL CASES
Remarks:
Dismissed
Listed On:
29 Apr 2022
In:
Judge
Category:
UNKNOWN
Original Order Copy
Get a certified copy of this order
Order Text
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s).7400-7401/2022
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 04-03-2022 in LPA No. 2/2022, 04-03-2022 in LPA No.4/2022 passed by the High Court Of Gujarat At Ahmedabad)
RAJGOR MANUBHAI KHODABHAI & ORS. Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
TALOD MUNICIPALITY & ORS. Respondent(s)
(FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.60540/2022-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT and IA No.60541/2022-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.)
Date : 29-04-2022 These petitions were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEET SARAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.K. MAHESHWARI
For Petitioner(s) Mr. H.A. Ahmadi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Nikhil Goel, AOR Mr. Darshan A. Dave, Adv. Mr. Aniruddha Deshmukh, Adv. Mr. kartik Kaushal, adv. Ms. Adity Roy, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Purvish Jitendra Malkan, Advocate on Record Mr. Deepak Sanchela, Advocate Ms. Dharita Purvish Malkan, Advocate Ms. Deepa Gorasia, Advocate Mr. Alok Kumar, Advocate Ms. Nandini Chhabra, Advocate Ms. Bhavna Sarkar, Adv. Mr. Yashashvi Virendra, Advocate
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts of these cases, we do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned order under Article 136 of the Constitution of India. However, keeping in view the fact that the petitioners are Digitally signed by ARJUN BISHT Date: 2022.04.29 15:36:17 IST Reason: Signature Not Verified
required to vacate the premises in question, for which the High Court has granted time till 31.03.2022, which period has already expired, we are of the opinion that the time to vacate the premises in question be extended for a further period.
Accordingly, while dismissing these petitions, we provide that the petitioners be permitted to occupy the premises in question till 30.06.2022. In case, petitioners do not vacate the premises in question voluntarily within the stipulated time, the respondent(s) shall have liberty to forcibly evict them.
The special leave petitions are, accordingly, dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of.
(ARJUN BISHT) | (PRADEEP KUMAR) | (ASHWANI THAKUR) |
---|---|---|
(COURT MASTER (SH) | (BRANCH OFFICER) | AR-CUM-PS |