NAGINBHAI KESHAVBHAI VANDAR v. PASCHIM GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LTD (FORMERLY KNOWN AS GUJARAT
FA/652/2013 · 2026-09-10
Ilesh J Vora, R T Vachhani
body2013
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2013 DAILYLAW 813 (GUJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2013 DAILYLAW 813 (GUJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
C/FA/652/2013(GJHC240389062013) ORDER DATED: 10/09/2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 652 of 2013 ========================================================== NAGINBHAI KESHAVBHAI VANDAR Versus PASCHIM GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LTD (FORMERLY KNOWN AS GUJARAT & ANR. ========================================================== Appearance: 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 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI
Date : 10/09/2026
ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA)
1. 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.
2. 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.
3. 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
C/FA/652/2013(GJHC240389062013) ORDER DATED: 10/09/2026 of the appellant. The permission as sought is granted.
4. 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.
5. 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.
(ILESH J. VORA,J) (R. T. VACHHANI, J) P.S. JOSHI 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