Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

C DOSHI

397 judgments delivered by benches including this judge — showing 1–200.

RUKSHANABANU ATIKUR REHMANKHANversusRAIS AHMED MOHAMMAD HANIF

27-WITHDRAWN @ ADM.STAGE

The applicant, Rukshananabu Atikur Rehmankhan, filed a civil application seeking condonation of delay for the registration of a Memorandum of Association (MCA). The respondent, Rais Ahmed Mohammad Hanif & others, were served but did not appear. The applicant's counsel, Mr. Sameer M. Mansuri, withdrew the condonation ap

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AHMEDABADversusJAVANJEE RAMAJI DABHI

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The Special Land Acquisition Officer filed a first appeal against a compensation award of less than Rs.5 lakh. The appellant sought condonation of delay in filing the appeal, which the court granted. The court noted a Gujarat State Government resolution dated 25‑10‑2016 classifying claims up to Rs.5 lakh as petty and d

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICERversusJAVANJEE RAMAJI DABHI

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The Special Land Acquisition Officer filed a first appeal against a compensation award of less than Rs.5 lakh. The appellant sought condonation of delay in filing the appeal, which the court granted. The court noted a Gujarat State Government resolution dated 25‑10‑2016 classifying claims up to Rs.5 lakh as petty and d

THE GUJARAT SHEEP AND WOOL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTDversusHIMATLAL TAPUBHAI SAPARA

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The Gujarat Sheep and Wool Development Corporation filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of a 185‑day delay in filing a petition for restoration of a second appeal. The respondent opposed, arguing that the decree under appeal had already been executed, rendering restoration futi

THE GUJARAT SHEEP AND WOOL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD.versusHIMATLAL TAPUBHAI SAPARA

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The Gujarat Sheep and Wool Development Corporation filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of a 185‑day delay in filing a petition for restoration of a second appeal. The respondent opposed, arguing that the decree under appeal had already been executed, rendering restoration futi

MEENABEN AKHILESH CHIPAAversusIRFANBHAI KASAMBHAI CHAUHAN

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The petitioners, Meenaben Akhilesh Chipaa and another, filed an application seeking condonation of delay in filing their first appeal against a decree. The respondents, Irfanbhai Kasambhai Chauhan and another, opposed the application. The court examined the averments made in the application regarding the reasons for th

THE STATE OF GUJARATversusLEGAL HEIRS OF DECEASED BHIKHABHAI GIGABHAI SOLANKI

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The State of Gujarat filed applications for condonation of delay and several first appeals against a compensation award to Hamirabhai Bhurabhai Varchand under the Land Acquisition Act. The court first allowed the condonation applications, excusing the delay in filing the main matters. It then considered the first appea

STATE OF GUJARAT THROUGH DEPUTY COLLECTORversusBHIMABHAI GIGABHAI

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The State of Gujarat filed applications for condonation of delay and first appeals challenging compensation awards under the Land Acquisition Act. The Court noted that each appeal involved compensation below Rs.5 lakh, which the State Government, by a 2016 Government Resolution, classifies as petty claims to be dispose

THE STATE OF GUJARATversusLEGAL HEIRS OF DECEASED KHIMABHAI UKABHAI SOLANKI

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The State of Gujarat filed applications for condonation of delay and several first appeals against a compensation award to Hamirabhai Bhurabhai Varchand under the Land Acquisition Act. The court first allowed the condonation applications, excusing the delay in filing the main matters. It then considered the first appea

STATE OF GUJARATversusLEGAL HEIRS OF DECEASED JADAV BHIMABHAI PARMAR

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The High Court of Gujarat considered applications for condonation of delay and a series of first appeals concerning compensation awards under the Land Acquisition Act. The court noted that each appeal involved compensation below Rs.5 lakh, which the State Government had classified as petty claims to be dealt with in Lo

THE STATE OF GUJARATversusNANUBHAI NAGJIBHAI

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The High Court of Gujarat considered applications for condonation of delay and a series of first appeals concerning compensation awards under the Land Acquisition Act. The court noted that each appeal involved compensation below Rs.5 lakh, which the State Government had classified as petty claims to be dealt with in Lo

THE STATE OF GUJARATversusBACHUBHAI TAPUBHAI

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The Gujarat High Court considered applications for condonation of delay and several first appeals concerning compensation awards under the Land Acquisition Act. The court noted that each appeal involved compensation below Rs.5 lakh, which the State Government had classified as petty claims to be dealt with in Lok Adala

STATE OF GUJARAT THROUGH DEPUTY COLLECTORversusKOLI UKABHAI JESHABHAI

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The State of Gujarat filed applications for condonation of delay and several first appeals against a compensation award to Hamirabhai Bhurabhai Varchand under the Land Acquisition Act. The court first allowed the condonation applications, excusing the delay in filing the main matters. It then considered the first appea

STATE OF GUJARAT THROUGH DEPUTY COLLECTORversusDEVABHAI KHIMABHAI

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The State of Gujarat filed an application for condonation of delay, which was granted, allowing the main matters to proceed. The first appeal concerned a compensation claim of less than Rs.5 lakh arising under the Land Acquisition Act. The State Government's 2016 Government Resolution classifies claims up to Rs.5 lakh

THE STATE OF GUJARATversusLEGAL HEIRS OF MANIBEN RAMBHAI PARMAR

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The State of Gujarat filed applications for condonation of delay and first appeals challenging compensation awards under the Land Acquisition Act. The Court noted that each appeal involved compensation below Rs.5 lakh, which the State Government, by a 2016 Government Resolution, classifies as petty claims to be dispose

OWNER/PARTNER, SWAN FOOD SWEETSversusURMILABEN MUKESHBHAI PANDYA

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The applicant, Owner/Partner of Swan Food Sweets, filed a civil application seeking condonation of delay in preferring the main matter of the suit. The application was presented before the High Court of Gujarat, Ahmedabad, before Hon'ble Mr. Justice J. C. Doshi. The court examined the averments made in the application

PASCHIM GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LIMITEDversusVITTHALBHAI BHIMABHAI BAMBHANIYA

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The petitioners, Paschim Gujarat Vij Company Limited and others, filed an application before the Gujarat High Court seeking condonation of delay in preferring the main civil matter. The respondents, represented by HCLS Committee and Mr. Jay H. Patel, opposed the application. The court examined whether the delay could b

NAROTTAM HIRALAL POKARversusADANI PORTS AND SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE LTD.

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The High Court of Gujarat restored Regular Civil Suit No. 209 of 2021 and the accompanying Civil Revision Application (CRA) after recalling its earlier order dated 23 February 2026. The court noted that interim relief, which stayed the suit proceedings, remained in effect and that the revisionist could still seek furth

NADODA PARMABHAI AJUBHAIversusNADODA HANSABEN D/O PARMABHAI W/O LALABHAI MOHANBHAI

46-ANY OTHER MODE @ FH

The appellant and respondent jointly requested the High Court to transfer the first appeal concerning a claim of Rs.15,57,000 to the District Court, Patan. The Court considered Section 30(3) of the Gujarat Civil Court Act, 2005, which empowers it to list the appeal before the appropriate district court when that court

TILAKRAJ KISHANLAL BHATIAversusBHAGWATI FLOUR MILLING LIMITED

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The petitioners, Tilakraj Kishanlal Bhatia & Ors., filed applications seeking condonation of delay in filing restoration applications before the High Court of Gujarat. The court examined the averments made in the condonation applications and found them satisfactory. Consequently, the court ordered that the delay in pre

TILAKRAJ KISHANLAL BHATIAversusBHAGWATI FLOUR MILLING LIMITED

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The petitioners, Tilakraj Kishanlal Bhatia & Ors., filed applications seeking condonation of delay in filing restoration applications before the High Court of Gujarat. The court examined the averments made in the condonation applications and found them satisfactory. Consequently, the court ordered that the delay in pre

TILAKRAJ KISHANLAL BHATIAversusBHAGWATI FLOUR MILLING LIMITED

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The petitioners, Tilakraj Kishanlal Bhatia & Ors., filed applications seeking condonation of delay in filing restoration applications before the High Court of Gujarat. The court examined the averments made in the condonation applications and found them satisfactory. Consequently, the court ordered that the delay in pre

TILAKRAJ KISHANLAL BHATIAversusBHAGWATI FLOUR MILLING LIMITED

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The petitioners, Tilakraj Kishanlal Bhatia & Ors., filed applications seeking condonation of delay in filing restoration applications before the High Court of Gujarat. The court examined the averments made in the condonation applications and found them satisfactory. Consequently, the court ordered that the delay in pre

OSWAL WELFARE SOCIETYversusVIRAM CO OP HOUSING SOICEYT LIMITED

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The Oswal Welfare Society filed an application seeking condonation of delay for filing a restoration application concerning a main civil suit. The High Court examined the averments and facts presented, and determined that the delay was justified. Consequently, the court condoned the delay and ordered that the main matt

OSWAL WELFARE SOCIETYversusVIRAM CO OP HOUSING SOICEYT LIMITED

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The Oswal Welfare Society filed an application seeking condonation of delay for filing a restoration application concerning a main civil suit. The High Court examined the averments and facts presented, and determined that the delay was justified. Consequently, the court condoned the delay and ordered that the main matt

DIPAKBHAI SAMATBHAI JOGIYANIversusJYOTIBEN DIPAKBHAI JOGIYANI

27-WITHDRAWN @ ADM.STAGE

The petitioner, Dipakbhai Samatbhai JogiYani, filed Special Civil Application No. 7776 of 2020 before the High Court of Gujarat. Subsequently, the petitioner's counsel, Mr. Pratik Y. Jasani, applied for permission to withdraw the matter. The Court considered the request for withdrawal and noted that no substantive issu

UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED.versusM D USMANRAZA

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The appellant, United India Insurance Company Limited, challenged a compensation award of less than Rs.5 lakh granted to the respondents, MD Usmanraza and others. The appellant also disputed its liability to pay interest under the insurance policy. The High Court examined the appeal and noted that the amount involved w

SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, NARMADA YOJANA UNIT -3versusPATEL JAYANTIBHAI ISHVARLAL

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Narmada Yojana Unit‑3, filed a first appeal challenging a compensation award of less than Rs 5 lakh and also sought condonation of delay in filing the appeal. The High Court considered the appellant’s request for condonation and the merits of entertaining an appeal where the disput

SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, NARMADA YOJANA UNIT -3versusPATEL BHIKHABHAI LALJIBHAI

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Narmada Yojana Unit‑3 filed a civil application seeking condonation of delay in filing a first appeal against a compensation award of less than Rs.5 lakh. The court examined the application and, noting the State Government's 2016 resolution that claims up to Rs.5 lakh are petty and

SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, NARMADA YOJANA UNIT -3versusPATEL UKABHAI MOHANDAS

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Narmada Yojana Unit‑3 filed a civil application seeking condonation of delay in filing a first appeal against a compensation order. The High Court of Gujarat, after hearing the applicant’s counsel, granted the condonation of delay. However, the Court noted that the compensation amo

SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, NARMADA YOJANA UNIT -3versusPATEL VIRJIBHAI NARSINHBHAI

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Narmada Yojana Unit‑3 filed a civil application seeking condonation of delay in filing a first appeal against a compensation order. The court allowed the condonation of delay but noted that the compensation amount involved was less than Rs 5 lakh, which the State Government had cla

GHANSYAMBHAI PARSOTTAMBHAI PATELversusPRAVINBHAI MAGANBHAI AMIN

43-DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT @ FH

The High Court noted that an advocate notice served on the appellants in First Appeal No. 4290 of 2018 returned indicating that one appellant had died and the other had been served but failed to appear. Consequently, the court dismissed the appeal for non‑prosecution and ordered the return of the record and pleadings t

LAKHUBHAI RAJSIBHAI VAGHELAversusGUJARAT HEAVY CHEMICALS LTD

46-ANY OTHER MODE @ FH

The appellant, Lakhubhai Rajsabhai Vaghela, appealed against Gujarat Heavy Chemicals Ltd after a money decree was executed against him. The respondent argued that the appeal had become infructuous because the executing court had already ordered simple imprisonment for non‑payment of the decretal amount. The appellant's

KAMARIBEN KARSHANBHAI KANGADversusSPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The petitioners sought condonation of a 2,740‑day delay in filing a first appeal against a land acquisition order, invoking Section 5 of the Limitation Act. Relying on an earlier order that had already condoned delay for a group of related matters, the court allowed the condonation subject to a cost deposit. The appeal

RANIBEN WD/O BHURABHAI JALUversusSPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The petitioners sought condonation of a 2,740‑day delay in filing a first appeal under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, relying on a prior order that had already condoned delay in related matters. The court, noting the waiver of notice by the State and the earlier precedent, allowed the condonation subject to a cost de

MADANLAL RADHELAL BANSALversusAGRAWAL SAMAJ TRUST DAHOD

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The appellants, trustees of Agarwal Samaj Trust, filed a petition under Section 56 of the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 seeking to have several immovable properties treated as trust assets and to restrain the former president and secretary (respondents) from disposing of them. The trial court converted the petition int

PASCHIM GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LIMITEDversusKIRITKUMAR NARSINHDAS DATANI

46-ANY OTHER MODE @ FH

Paschim Gujarat Vij Company Limited appealed a civil suit against Kiritkumar Narsindas Datani, with the suit valued at Rs.6,08,064.90. The High Court, applying the Gujarat Civil Courts Act, found that the value exceeded the jurisdictional limit for a first appeal before it. Consequently, the Court ordered the appeal to

PARVATIBEN ARJUNBHAI NEPALIversusPASCHIM GUJARAT VIJ CO. LTD

44-PARTLY ALLOWED @ FH

The deceased, an apprentice of Paschim Gujarat Vij Company Ltd (PGVCL), died from electrocution while repairing an electric pole. The widow claimed Rs.10,00,000 compensation alleging absolute negligence by PGVCL, while the company contended the death resulted from the deceased's own negligence. The trial court awarded

KAMABEN TERSING ABHESING BHURIYAversusUNION OF INDIA THROUGH GENERAL MANAGER

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The appellants sought Rs.4 lakh compensation before the Railway Claims Tribunal for the death of a family member in a railway accident, but filed the claim after a delay of 5 years, 2 months and 1 day. The High Court examined whether the statutory limitation period could be relaxed in view of the claimant's loss and th

THE STATE OF GUJARATversusJADAVBHAI LIMBABHAI

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

Two brothers filed separate land acquisition proceedings for the same parcel of land, one in the Reference Court at Bhavnagar (LAR No.12 of 2009) and another in the Reference Court at Botad. The Bhavnagar court initially awarded compensation of Rs.10 per square metre, which was later enhanced by the Coordinate Bench on

ARAB ABDULLA IBRAHIMversusARAB UMAR IBRAHIM DECD.THROUGH THE LRS

46-ANY OTHER MODE @ FH

The petitioners, Arab Abdulla Ibrahim & Anr., filed civil applications seeking to bring heirs and condone delay, aiming to expedite the execution of a partition decree dated 19‑Oct‑2002 against the estate of the deceased Arab Umar Ibrahim. Their counsel, Mr. Aman A Sama, informed the court that the applications were no

REKHABEN W/O AGARAJI VIRCHANDJI THAKORversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The petitioner, Rekhaben, filed a criminal miscellaneous application (Cr.M.A.) and subsequently sought condonation of delay in filing the application. The petitioner’s counsel, Mansi M. Mulani, submitted a delay condonation application (R/CR.MA.8171/2026). The respondent, the State of Gujarat, was represented by Rohan

PRITI ASHISH JOBANPUTRAversusSERIOUS FRAUD INVESTIGATION OFFICE THRU MUNISH GARG

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

Priti Ashish Jobanputra filed a criminal miscellaneous application seeking restoration of Special Criminal Application No. 3988 of 2021. The respondent, the Serious Fraud Investigation Office through Munish Garg and another, opposed the restoration. Counsel for the applicant, Yuvraj G. Thakore, and counsel for the resp

HEIRS OF BHAILALBHAI MANSANGBHAIversusSPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER

33-CA DISPOSED OF

The Special Land Acquisition Officer and others acquired land in Osara village for the Narmada Project under the Land Acquisition Act, awarding Rs.1.90 per square meter. The claimants challenged this award before a Reference Court, which granted additional compensation of Rs.90.60 per square meter. The appellants (the

SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICERversusH/O BHAILALBHAI MANSANGBHAI

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The Special Land Acquisition Officer and others acquired land in Osara village for the Narmada Project under the Land Acquisition Act, awarding Rs.1.90 per square meter. The claimants challenged this award before a Reference Court, which granted additional compensation of Rs.90.60 per square meter. The appellants (the

AAMALIYAR CHHAGANBHAI KOYABHAIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The applicant filed a civil application seeking condonation of delay in preferring the main matters before the High Court of Gujarat. The respondent, the State of Gujarat and others, opposed the application. The court examined the averments made in the applications. Finding the applicant's explanations satisfactory, th

SAROJBEN VADILAL BHOIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The applicant filed a civil application seeking condonation of delay in preferring the main matters before the High Court of Gujarat. The respondent, the State of Gujarat and others, opposed the application. The court examined the averments made in the applications. Finding the applicant's explanations satisfactory, th

MAYANK SANTOSHKUMAR JOSHIversusSAUMYA JOSHI D/O RUCHI PANDE W/O MAYANK JOSHI

27-WITHDRAWN @ ADM.STAGE

Mayank Santos... Joshi filed a Special Civil Application No.1993 of 2024 before the High Court of Gujarat against Saumya Joshi. The petitioner, through Advocate Alay A Dave and counsel Sumit K Prajapati, sought relief but later informed the Court that the substantive matter was scheduled for a final hearing in the tria

BHAVIKA HITENDRASINH JETHVAversusACT INFRA PORT LTD.

35-ANY OTHER MODE @ ADM.STAGE

The appellant, a work‑injured employee who lost three toes, appealed under Section 30 of the Employees' Compensation Act against the Workman Commissioner’s award of Rs 29,354 plus interest. The Commissioner had assessed disability solely on the Schedule of Injuries, disregarding a certificate of permanent disablement a

EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATIONversusAMBALAL SARABHAI ENTERPRISES LIMITED

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The Employees State Insurance Corporation filed an application for condonation of delay in preferring the main matter against Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Ltd and another. The respondents deposited the demanded amount with objection, prompting the appellant to seek permission to withdraw the appeal. The court examined

KANUBHAI ALIAS KANAIYALAL MANEKLAL SHETHversusBHARATBHAI MOTIBHAI RAJPUT

58-RULE ISSUED & RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @FH

The appellant, Kanubhai, claimed ownership of a one‑room property in Shahibaug Cantonment, originally purchased by his father in 1935 and later entered in the mutation register in 1979 (and again in 2018). He filed a civil suit in 2014 seeking recovery and possession against the respondents. The trial court dismissed t

PASCHIM GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LIMITEDversusBHIKHABHAI CHAGANBHAI BHAKHAR

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The plaintiff, a farmer, was electrocuted on 24‑Nov‑1998 when he came into contact with an earthing wire of a transformer owned by Paschim Gujarat Vij Company Limited (PGVCL), resulting in permanent total disability. He sued PGVCL for compensation of Rs 10,00,000, and the trial court partially decreed Rs 6,10,000 with

REGIONAL DIRECTORversusSHREE MAHILA GRUH UDYOG LIJJATPAPAD

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The Employees State Insurance Corporation (ESIC) issued notices demanding contribution from Shree Mahila Gruh Udyog Lijjat Papad, a society of women who roll papads at home, alleging that the society was an "establishment" under the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948. The ESIC Court had earlier cancelled the notices,

REGIONAL DIRECTORversusSHREE MAHILA GRUH UDYOG LIJJATPAPAD

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The Employees State Insurance Corporation (ESIC) issued notices demanding contribution from Shree Mahila Gruh Udyog Lijjat Papad, a society of women who roll papads at home, alleging that the society was an "establishment" under the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948. The ESIC Court had earlier cancelled the notices,

R.K.CHAUDHARYversusMANAGER KALPTARU PAPERS LTD.

46-ANY OTHER MODE @ FH

In a first appeal, R.K. Chaudhary challenged the award of Rs.1,34,400 with 6% interest granted by the Workman Commissioner, alleging that the Commissioner failed to pass the mandatory penalty order under the Employees' Compensation Act. The High Court observed that the omission of the penalty order was a procedural def

HDFC ERGO GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTDversusRAMBHIBEN KESHAVBHAI ODEDARA

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

HDFC ERGO General Insurance Co Ltd and an associate filed a first appeal against a compensation order awarded to Ramabh... and others. The contested compensation was less than Rs.5 lakh. The High Court, after hearing submissions, held that the amount was too small to warrant adjudication of the appeal. Consequently, th

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICERversusKARSHANBHAI GAFURBHAI

26-DISMISSED @ ADM.STAGE

The Special Land Acquisition Officer filed applications seeking condonation of delay, which the court granted, allowing the main matters to proceed. The first appeal concerned a compensation claim of less than Rs.5 lakh, which under a 2016 Government Resolution is treated as a petty claim to be disposed of in Lok Adala

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICERversusKARSHANBHAI GAFURBHAI

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The Special Land Acquisition Officer filed applications seeking condonation of delay, which the court granted, allowing the main matters to proceed. The first appeal concerned a compensation claim of less than Rs.5 lakh, which under a 2016 Government Resolution is treated as a petty claim to be disposed of in Lok Adala

MOTI LAKHA KOLIversusSPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The petitioners, represented by Mr. Vijay H. Nagesh, filed an application seeking condonation of delay in filing the main civil suit concerning land acquisition. The High Court examined the averments made in the application and determined that the delay could be condoned. However, the Court held that the claimants woul

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER , NARMADA YOJANA UNIT 2versusMANGAJI GOPALJI

26-DISMISSED @ ADM.STAGE

The Special Land Acquisition Officer filed applications seeking condonation of delay, which the court granted, allowing the main matters to proceed. The first appeal concerned a compensation claim of less than Rs.5 lakh, which under a 2016 Government Resolution is treated as a petty claim to be disposed of in Lok Adala

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER , NARMADA YOJANA UNIT 2versusMANGAJI GOPALJI

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The Special Land Acquisition Officer filed applications seeking condonation of delay, which the court granted, allowing the main matters to proceed. The first appeal concerned a compensation claim of less than Rs.5 lakh, which under a 2016 Government Resolution is treated as a petty claim to be disposed of in Lok Adala

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICERversusLEGAL HEIRS OF LATE JESANGJI FULAJI

26-DISMISSED @ ADM.STAGE

The Special Land Acquisition Officer filed applications seeking condonation of delay, which the court granted, allowing the main matters to proceed. The first appeal concerned a compensation claim of less than Rs.5 lakh, which under a 2016 Government Resolution is treated as a petty claim to be disposed of in Lok Adala

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICERversusLEGAL HEIRS OF LATE JESANGJI FULAJI

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The Special Land Acquisition Officer filed applications seeking condonation of delay, which the court granted, allowing the main matters to proceed. The first appeal concerned a compensation claim of less than Rs.5 lakh, which under a 2016 Government Resolution is treated as a petty claim to be disposed of in Lok Adala

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,AHMEDABADversusBABARJI ANDRAJI

26-DISMISSED @ ADM.STAGE

The Special Land Acquisition Officer filed applications seeking condonation of delay, which the court granted, allowing the main matters to proceed. The first appeal concerned a compensation claim of less than Rs.5 lakh, which under a 2016 Government Resolution is treated as a petty claim to be disposed of in Lok Adala

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER,AHMEDABADversusBABARJI ANDRAJI

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The Special Land Acquisition Officer filed applications seeking condonation of delay, which the court granted, allowing the main matters to proceed. The first appeal concerned a compensation claim of less than Rs.5 lakh, which under a 2016 Government Resolution is treated as a petty claim to be disposed of in Lok Adala

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICERversusASHOKBHAI PARSOTTAMBHAI PATEL

26-DISMISSED @ ADM.STAGE

The Special Land Acquisition Officer filed applications seeking condonation of delay, which the court granted, allowing the main matters to proceed. The first appeal concerned a compensation claim of less than Rs.5 lakh, which under a 2016 Government Resolution is treated as a petty claim to be disposed of in Lok Adala

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICERversusASHOKBHAI PARSOTTAMBHAI PATEL

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The Special Land Acquisition Officer filed applications seeking condonation of delay, which the court granted, allowing the main matters to proceed. The first appeal concerned a compensation claim of less than Rs.5 lakh, which under a 2016 Government Resolution is treated as a petty claim to be disposed of in Lok Adala

UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITEDversusKHATRI HITESHKUMAR JAYESHBHAI

26-DISMISSED @ ADM.STAGE

The appellant, United India Insurance Company Ltd, filed a first appeal against a compensation award of less than Rs.5 lakh granted to the respondents, Khatri Hitesh Kumar Jayeshbhai and others. The appellant sought to stay the award and maintain interim relief. The High Court observed that the amount involved was mode

SWASTI TAPA PATRA W/O CHANDRA SHEKHAR PATRAversusMANSUKHBHAI AAMBABHAI TALPARA

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The plaintiff, a seller of brass parts and hardware, sued the defendant for the recovery of Rs 42,06,250 remaining unpaid on invoices, together with interest. The defendant failed to appear or file a written statement, leading the trial court to pass an ex‑parte decree for the amount with interest (initially recorded a

SANTKRUPA CORPORATIONversusDENA BANK

43-DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT @ FH

The appellants filed a first appeal (C/FA/4968/2008) in the Gujarat High Court in 2008. Notices were served to some appellants, but they failed to appear, and notices could not be served to others because they resided outside Gujarat. No legal representation was present for any of the appellants at the time of hearing.

PASCHIM GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LIMITEDversusHEIRS OF DECD. RAMBHAI RAMSHIBHAI LAKHATRANA

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The deceased Rambhai Ramsibhai was electrocuted while attempting to fix a fuse on a transformer owned by Paschim Gujarat Vij Company Ltd (PGVCL). The plaintiffs, his heirs, sued PGVCL for compensation alleging the company's negligence in maintaining the transformer and overhead lines. PGVCL contended that the death res

PRAVIN VASANBHAI RATHODversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

27-WITHDRAWN @ ADM.STAGE

The petitioner filed a Special Civil Application (SCA) mistakenly instead of a Special Criminal Application or revision. The petitioner sought permission to withdraw the SCA and to file the correct application within three weeks. The Court, noting the inadvertent filing, granted the request to withdraw the petition and

NILKANTH VIKRAM TRIVEDIversusDEVSHRI D/O HEMANT KUMAR SHASTRI

35-ANY OTHER MODE @ ADM.STAGE

The petition challenged a Family Court order dated 06.06.2026 granting interim custody of a minor child in Civil Misc. Application No. 83 of 2021. While the petition was pending, the parties entered into an adhoc custody arrangement and filed a joint affidavit confirming the settlement. The High Court verified the affi

CHHAGANBHAI NATHABHAI HIRPARA (DELETED)versusASHWINBHAI GHELABHAI RADADIYA

27-WITHDRAWN @ ADM.STAGE

The appellants filed a first appeal before the Gujarat High Court challenging a civil judgment, but the suit value was only Rs.1,310. The Court, relying on the precedent set in Maliben Kamabhal Harijan v. Jagjivan Nanji (2023 SCC Online Guj 171), held that appeals involving such low-valued suits are not maintainable be

TATA AIG GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.versusGIRVATSINH NATHUBHAI PARMAR

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The High Court of Gujarat entertained an application for restoration of First Appeal No. 3822 of 2024 filed by Tata AIG General Insurance Co. Ltd. The appeal challenged a judgment in MACP No. 416 of 2019 that ordered the insurer to pay Rs.13,04,480 with 9% interest. An earlier order dated 22‑11‑2024 had dismissed the a

DEVSHIBHAI GORDHANBHAIversusSPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER

58-RULE ISSUED & RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @FH

Devshibhai Gordhanbhai appealed against the Special Land Acquisition Officer challenging the dismissal of his land reference applications in Land Reference Case No.93 of 2009 on the ground that he was not present before the reference court. The lower court had dismissed the applications without proper adjudication of e

PATEL DINESH JETHABHAIversusTHE STATE OF GUJARAT

26-DISMISSED @ ADM.STAGE

The appellant, Vinodbhai Chhaganbhai, filed multiple civil applications for condonation of delay and related matters, which were pending before the High Court of Gujarat. The appellant's counsel sought permission to withdraw these applications. The Court, after considering the request, granted permission to withdraw an

VINODBHAI CHHAGANBHAIversusDEPUTY COLLECTOR

26-DISMISSED @ ADM.STAGE

The appellant, Vinodbhai Chhaganbhai, filed multiple civil applications for condonation of delay and related matters, which were pending before the High Court of Gujarat. The appellant's counsel sought permission to withdraw these applications. The Court, after considering the request, granted permission to withdraw an

DEV MENAND KALAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

26-DISMISSED @ ADM.STAGE

The appellant, Vinodbhai Chhaganbhai, filed multiple civil applications for condonation of delay and related matters, which were pending before the High Court of Gujarat. The appellant's counsel sought permission to withdraw these applications. The Court, after considering the request, granted permission to withdraw an

SHANTILAL JERAMBHAIversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

26-DISMISSED @ ADM.STAGE

The appellant, Vinodbhai Chhaganbhai, filed multiple civil applications for condonation of delay and related matters, which were pending before the High Court of Gujarat. The appellant's counsel sought permission to withdraw these applications. The Court, after considering the request, granted permission to withdraw an

UNION OF INDIAversusKALYANDAS GOMATIDASHJI

46-ANY OTHER MODE @ FH

The Union of India filed a first appeal (C/FA/2693/2008) against Kalyandas Gomatidashji and another respondent. The appellant sought substitute service of the summons, but respondent No.1 had died and his legal heirs were not brought on record. The appellant argued that a fresh application for substitute service could

UNION OF INDIAversusKALYANDAS GOMATIDASHJI

46-ANY OTHER MODE @ FH

The Union of India filed a first appeal (C/FA/2693/2008) against Kalyandas Gomatidashji and another respondent. The appellant sought substitute service of the summons, but respondent No.1 had died and his legal heirs were not brought on record. The appellant argued that a fresh application for substitute service could

SALILKUMAR ISHWARBHAI PATELversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The applicant filed a civil application for condonation of delay in a matter pending before the High Court of Gujarat, seeking permission to pursue the main suit after a delay of 2,574 days. The Supreme Court, in SLP (Civil) Diary No. 349 of 2023, allowed the applicant to file a review of the earlier appeal dated 1 Feb

M/S SARJAN INFRATECH PROP. KARM PATELversusLEGAL HEIRS OF MAIYAT SOMABHAI THAKOR

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The applicant, M/s Sarjan Infratech Prop., filed a condonation of delay application in Civil Application No. 5584 of 2025 before the Gujarat High Court. The application sought condonation of the delay in preferring the main matter. The court examined the averments made in the application. Finding them satisfactory, the

HIRJI JADVA VARSANIversusPINDORIYA & CO.

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The plaintiff, Hirji Jadva Varsani, entered into a subcontract with Pindoriya & Co. for constructing police quarters and later sued for Rs 5,06,029 including interest, alleging unpaid security deposit, outstanding bills and interest. The trial court, after hearing evidence, decreed only Rs 35,096 with 6% interest, find

PATEL NIKITABEN D/O PATEL HASMUKHBHAI MANILALversusPATEL BHUPENDRAKUMAR VISHNUBHAI

35-ANY OTHER MODE @ ADM.STAGE

The petition arose from an interim order of the Mehsana Family Court granting the mother visitation of her minor son on Sundays and festivals. The mother sought modification of the visitation schedule. The parties reached a joint consensus, which was presented before the Gujarat High Court. The High Court modified the

STATE OF GUJARATversusMUKESH CORPORATION

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The State of Gujarat filed a first appeal (No. 586 of 2000) before the Gujarat High Court against Mukesh Corporation. The appeal concerned a suit where the monetary value was less than Rs.5.00 lakhs. The Court examined Section 30(3) of the Gujarat Civil Courts Act, 2005, which stipulates that appeals involving amounts

MUKESH CORPORATIONversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The appellant Mukesh Corporation filed a first appeal before the Gujarat High Court challenging a decision of the trial court. The amount in dispute was less than Rs.5.00 lakhs. The High Court examined Section 30(3) of the Gujarat Civil Courts Act, 2005, which stipulates that appeals involving such a monetary limit mus

GUJARAT VIDHYUT BOARDversusIILABEN BHARATBHAI JOSHI

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The plaintiffs, the wife and minor children of the deceased, sued Gujarat Vidhyut Board (GVB) for compensation after the deceased was electrocuted when a live wire snapped on a terrace. The trial court partially decreed the suit, awarding Rs.4,85,000 with interest, which GVB appealed under Section 96 of the CPC. GVB ar

BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED THRO'ASST. GENERAL MANAGERversusMANHERLAL RAMNIKLAL

43-DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT @ FH

The case is a second appeal (C/SA/132/2007) filed by Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL) and others against Manherlal Ramniklal and others in the Gujarat High Court. The appellant’s counsel, Mr. Sandip C. Shah and Ms. Roopal R. Patel, appeared, while the respondents were represented by a notice of service. The matter w

HEIRS OF MAHANT DAYARAMDAS- BAI PADMA WD/O DAYARAMDAS (DELETED)versusCHARITY COMMISSIONER

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The Gujarat High Court examined a protracted dispute over the Narsinhji Temple Trust, determining whether the temple and its surrounding lands constitute a public trust or private property of the Mahants. The court considered the validity of multiple First Appeals (77/1979, 478/1979, and 4206/2024) and civil applicatio

SHASHIKANT HARIBHAI SOLANKIversusKIRANBEN W/O. SHASHIKANT SOLANKI AND D/O.JADAVBHAI PARMAR

58-RULE ISSUED & RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @FH

The petitioner challenged the Family Court's framing of issues in a family suit, contending that the court erroneously placed both a positive and negative burden on the plaintiff by asking whether the photographs were "genuine" and also "not edited or morphed." The respondent conceded that the wording was contradictory

PRAKASH SHEETALDASversusVASANTRAI MOTILAL TANNA

43-DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT @ FH

The petitioner, Prakash Shetal... filed a civil revision application (C/CRA/275/2018) before the Gujarat High Court. Despite multiple listings, the petitioner failed to appear in court, either personally or through counsel, even after an advocate notice was served. The court observed that the petitioner appeared disint

LOTUS CONSTRUCITONversusUNION OF INDIA

43-DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT @ FH

The petition filed by the appellant was listed repeatedly before the High Court of Gujarat. Despite an advocate notice being served, the petitioner failed to appear personally or through counsel. The court inferred that the petitioner was not interested in pursuing the case. Consequently, the petition was dismissed for

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICERversusLEGAL HEIRS OF HAMIDKHAN HAJI BAVA

26-DISMISSED @ ADM.STAGE

The Special Land Acquisition Officer appealed against a compensation award to the legal heirs of Hamidkhan Haji Bava, where the amount involved was less than Rs 5 lakh. The Gujarat State Government’s 2016 policy classifies claims up to Rs 5 lakh as petty and directs that such matters be withdrawn in Lok Adalat. The Hig

THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICERversusLEGAL HEIRS OF MUMTAZBEGUM KHUSHALBAVA

26-DISMISSED @ ADM.STAGE

The Special Land Acquisition Officer appealed against a compensation award to the legal heirs of Mumtazbegum Khushalbava, alleging that the award should be reviewed. The compensation amount in dispute was less than Rs.5 lakh, which under a Gujarat Government Resolution dated 25‑10‑2016 is classified as a petty claim an

SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICERversusBHIMSANGBHAI JIBHAI DHARMA

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The State appealed a common judgment and award dated 31 January 2009, which had granted the original claimants an additional compensation of Rs 100 per square metre over the amount awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The claimants' lands in Osara village were acquired f

BHIMSANGBHAI JIBHAI DHARMAversusSPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The State appealed a common judgment and award dated 31 January 2009, which had granted the original claimants an additional compensation of Rs 100 per square metre over the amount awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The claimants' lands in Osara village were acquired f

SAIYED SAMSUDDIN GULAM MAYUDDINversusSPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER

46-ANY OTHER MODE @ FH

The State appealed a common judgment and award dated 31 January 2009, which had granted the original claimants an additional compensation of Rs 100 per square metre over the amount awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The claimants' lands in Osara village were acquired f

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.versusBHAYALUBHA BHARATSINH

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The appellant New India Assurance Co. Ltd. filed a first appeal against a compensation order awarded to the claimants Bhayalubha Bharatsinh & Ors. The court noted that the amount in dispute was less than Rs.5,00,000, which is considered a small claim. Considering the modest quantum and the benevolent nature of the Empl

DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGERversusGULAMRASUL HUSAINMIYA MALEK

26-DISMISSED @ ADM.STAGE

The High Court of Gujarat dismissed three first appeals filed by the General Manager against Rupsang Amarsang & Anr. because the compensation claimed was less than Rs.5 lakh. The State Government had issued a resolution on 25-10-2016 classifying claims up to Rs.5 lakh as petty and directing their disposal. After hearin

GENERAL MANAGER , O.N.G.C.versusNANDUBA MERUJI

26-DISMISSED @ ADM.STAGE

The High Court of Gujarat dismissed three first appeals filed by the General Manager against Rupsang Amarsang & Anr. because the compensation claimed was less than Rs.5 lakh. The State Government had issued a resolution on 25-10-2016 classifying claims up to Rs.5 lakh as petty and directing their disposal. After hearin

GENERAL MANAGERversusRUPSANG AMARSANG

26-DISMISSED @ ADM.STAGE

The High Court of Gujarat dismissed three first appeals filed by the General Manager against Rupsang Amarsang & Anr. because the compensation claimed was less than Rs.5 lakh. The State Government had issued a resolution on 25-10-2016 classifying claims up to Rs.5 lakh as petty and directing their disposal. After hearin

UDAYSINGH PRATAP PADVIversusUNION OF INDIA THROUGH GENERAL MANAGER

40-WITHDRAWN @ FH

The appellants, Udaysingh Pratap Padvi & others, filed a first appeal before the Gujarat High Court against a decree of the Union of India. During the hearing, the counsel for the appellants sought the Court’s permission to withdraw the appeal. The learned Judge considered the request and, exercising the Court’s inhere

GOPAL OMPRAKASH MITTAL PROP. OF N/S KHATUSHYAM CONSTRversusMAHENDRASINGH M RATHOD

46-ANY OTHER MODE @ FH

The appellant, Gopal Omprakash Mittal, filed a first appeal against a money decree of less than Rs.10 lakh concerning a suit for recovery of Rs.10 lakh. The Gujarat High Court noted that a 2007 notification (C-2002/93) had expanded the jurisdiction of District Courts to entertain first appeals up to Rs.10 lakh. Consequ

MAHARASHTRA KRISHNA VALLEY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONversusKALAVATIBEN PRAVINBHAI JINGAR

43-DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT @ FH

The appeal filed by Maharashtra Krishna Valley Development Corporation and another against Kalavitaben Pravinbhai Jingar was listed repeatedly before the Gujarat High Court. Despite service of notice, the appellants failed to appear in person or through counsel. The court observed that the appellants showed no interest

MAVJIBHAI KANJIBHAI JUNGIversusLATE SHAMJIBHAI GOVINDBHAI BAROYA SINCE DIED THROUGH LH

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The appellant, owner of the fishing boat "Devprayag," appealed against the Workman Commissioner’s order granting Rs.7,58,240 compensation to the heirs of the deceased sailor, Shamjibhai Govindbhai Baroya. The appellant argued that no employer‑employee relationship existed and that the Commissioner erred in accepting th

DISTRICT MANAGER / AREA MANAGER, FCI,versusVAIBHAV TRANSPORT

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The appellant, District Manager/Area Manager of FCI, filed a first appeal challenging a compensation award of less than Rs.5 lakh. The court noted that the amount involved was modest and, after hearing arguments, decided not to entertain the appeal on the ground of its smallness. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed

PRANALINA D/O PRAFFULCHANDRA DEEPAKversusSANJAY BACHUBHAI SHARMA

37-DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT @ ADMISSION

In Special Civil Application No. 8494 of 2025, petitioner Pranalina filed a petition against respondent Sanjay Sharma. The petitioner’s counsel, Ms. Niyati H. Sampat, was absent when the matter was called, and the respondent failed to file a DS affidavit by the stipulated deadline of 8 June 2026. The court had previous

KOMAL KANTIBHAI VASTARPARAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

Komal Kantibhai Vastarpara filed a criminal miscellaneous application seeking restoration of the main matter before the High Court of Gujarat, Ahmedabad. The respondents, the State of Gujarat and others, were represented by counsel. The court examined the facts stated in the application. It found no impediment to resto

SHAILESHKUMAR BHAGAVANBHAI PARMARversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The petitioner, Shailesh Kumar Bhagwanbhai Parmar, filed a criminal miscellaneous application seeking condonation of delay in filing a restoration application. The High Court examined the averments made in the delay condonation application and found them satisfactory. Consequently, the Court condoned the delay and allo

BHARATKUMAR MANSUKHLAL PATEL THRO'POAversusJAGUBHAI GOVINDBHAI PATEL DELETED

43-DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT @ FH

The petitioners filed First Appeals No. 1467, 1468 and 1469 of 2013 before the High Court of Gujarat. No advocate appeared on behalf of the appellants despite notice being served. The Court observed that the appellants had not prosecuted the matter. Consequently, the Court dismissed First Appeal No. 1467 for non‑prosec

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTDversusMADHURIBEN WD/O SATYADEV TENUNBHAI CHAUHAN

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The appellant, New India Assurance Co Ltd, filed a first appeal against a compensation award of less than Rs.5 lakh granted to the respondents, Madhuriben and others. The court noted that the amount involved was modest and, after hearing arguments, decided not to entertain the appeal on the ground of the smallness of t

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO LTDversusUMAR SONU JAT

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The appellant New India Assurance Co Ltd filed a first appeal against a compensation award granted to the respondents Umar Sonu Jat and another. The award was less than Rs.5 lakh. After hearing the parties, the Gujarat High Court held that, owing to the low quantum of the award, it would not entertain the appeal and di

MADHUBEN JANABHAI PATELversusCHARITY COMMISSIONER

46-ANY OTHER MODE @ FH

The petitioners (Madhuben Janabhai Patel & Ors.) filed a first appeal before the Gujarat High Court against the Charity Commissioner and others. Notice of appearance was served on appellant No.1 and No.2, but no counsel appeared to represent them. Appellant No.3 had died, and no steps were taken to substitute or contin

MADHUBEN JANABHAI PATELversusCHARITY COMMISSIONER

46-ANY OTHER MODE @ FH

The petitioners filed a first appeal (No. 3565 of 2012) before the Gujarat High Court. The court served advocate notices to appellant Nos. 1 and 2, but no counsel appeared to represent them. Appellant No. 3 was found to have expired, and no steps were taken to substitute representation. The court held that the appeal c

M/S. H. NAGINDAS COMPANYversusM/S. ASHWIN KASHIRAM AND COMPANY, A PARTNERSHIP FIRM

40-WITHDRAWN @ FH

The appellant, M/s. H. Nagindas Company, filed a first appeal (No. 1245 of 2016) before the High Court of Gujarat. The appellant’s counsel submitted a communication indicating the appellant’s desire to withdraw the appeal. The court recorded the communication and considered the request for withdrawal. No substantive is

VINODBHAI BADRIPRASAD SHUKALversusSHRI KASHI VISHWANATH SANSKRUT MAHAVIDHYALAY

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The applicant, Vinodbhai Badriprasad Shukal, filed a civil application seeking condonation of delay in preferring the main matter before the High Court of Gujarat. The application was supported by counsel Mr. Deepakkumar R. Jatav and Mr. S.P. Kotia. The court examined the averments made in the application regarding the

M/S. OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LTD.versusEMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION

26-DISMISSED @ ADM.STAGE

The Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 seeking condonation of a 610‑day delay in filing a first appeal under Section 85 of the Employees' State Insurance Act against an order of the ESI Court, Vadodara dated 28‑12‑2023. The corporation claimed the delay

UNION OF INDIA THROUGH GENERAL MANAGERversusAMIT RAJESHBHAI JOSHIAR

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The respondent Amit Rajeshbhai Joshiar suffered severe injuries, including amputation of his left hand, after falling from a moving train at Jamnagar station while assisting his mother who held a reservation ticket. He claimed compensation of Rs 7.60 lakh under the Railway Act, and the Railway Claims Tribunal awarded t

TEJMOHAMMAD REHAMATALI MANSURIversusUNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.

27-WITHDRAWN @ ADM.STAGE

The applicant, TejMohammad Rehamatali Mansuri, filed a civil application seeking condonation of delay. The applicant's counsel later sought permission to withdraw the application. The court granted permission to withdraw, disposing of the application as withdrawn and discharging the rule. Consequently, the registration

PRAKASH GOVINDBHAI VAGHELAversusFOREST DEPARTMENT

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The petitioner, Prakash Govindbhai Vaghela, filed a civil application seeking condonation of delay in preferring the main matter of his first appeal against the Forest Department and another party. The application was presented before the High Court of Gujarat, Ahmedabad, with Mr. Hasit H. Joshi appearing for the petit

DEPUTY ENGINEER, PASHCHIM GUJARAT VIJ COMPANY LIMITEDversusVARSHABEN MUKESHBHAI

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The Deputy Engineer of Pashchim Gujarat Vij Company Limited and others filed a civil application seeking condonation of delay in preferring the main matter of their suit. The respondents were served notice. The sole issue before the High Court was whether the delay in filing the main suit could be condoned. The court e

SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICERversusPARSOTTAMBHAI RAMJIBHAI

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The Special Land Acquisition Officer and others filed two civil applications before the Gujarat High Court: one seeking condonation of delay (Civil Application No.2079 of 2022) and another seeking to bring the heirs of the original claimants on record (Civil Application No.1 of 2023). The court examined whether the del

UNITED INSURANCE COMPANY LTD.versusJAYANTIBHAI JOITARAM PRAJAPATI

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The United India Insurance Company Ltd. filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 seeking condonation of a 135‑day delay in preferring a first appeal against a judgment and decree of a civil suit. The appeal was delayed beyond the prescribed period, and the respondents were served but did not app

BHARATBHAI MAGJIBHAI PATELversusCHUNILAL MERVANBHAI PATEL

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The plaintiffs, Bharatbhai Magjibhai Patel and others, filed a suit seeking a declaration and permanent injunction against Chunilal Mervanbhai Patel and others, claiming ownership of a 3‑acre‑36‑guntha land in Panikhadak and alleging the defendants were attempting to trespass. The trial court dismissed the suit, holdin

TUSHAR NALINKANT PATELversusDEEPA SOMABHAI PATEL W/O. TUSHAR NALINKANT PATEL

27-WITHDRAWN @ ADM.STAGE

The petitioner, Tushar Nalinkant Patel, sought the Court's permission to withdraw the present special civil application and to file a fresh application before the trial court for the production of electronic evidence. The learned counsel for the petitioner made this request, and the Court granted the permission, orderi

DAHYABHAI LAKHMANBHAI KUBERBHAIversusSPL. LAQ OFFICER

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The appellant challenged the compensation awarded by the Reference Court for land acquired under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, arguing that the award of Rs.13 per square metre was inadequate given the land's fruitfulness and market value. The respondent contended that the award was proper and pointed to a prio

BHAGVATPRASAD BHIKHABHAI PATELversus.

43-DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT @ FH

The appellant, Bhagvatprasad Bhikhabai Patel, filed a first appeal but failed to appear when the matter was called out twice. No representation was made on behalf of the appellant. Consequently, the Court dismissed the appeal for non‑prosecution. No substantive issues were addressed, and no legal reasoning beyond the p

AVANI D/O CHIRANGAT GOPALKISHAN BALAN PILLAI W/O ROMESH P VYASversusROMESH P. VYAS

58-RULE ISSUED & RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @FH

Avani, the petitioner, sought restoration of a family divorce suit (No. 314 of 2013) that had been dismissed for non‑appearance. The Family Court had also dismissed her restoration application, citing lack of personal appearance, use of a power of attorney, and the absence of a video‑conferencing facility. The petition

PATEL PARBAT GOKALversusEXECUTIVE ENGINEER (CONSTRUCTION)

40-WITHDRAWN @ FH

The appellant, LH of Jasmatbai Laxmanbai Parbatbhai Jasmatbai Dobariya, filed first appeals (Nos. 2810 and 2811 of 2019) against the order of the Principal District Judge, Junagadh. The appellant's counsel sought permission to withdraw the appeals. The High Court granted permission, ordered the appeals to be withdrawn,

ARPITA RAVIKANT CHRISTIANversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

40-WITHDRAWN @ FH

The petitioner, represented by HCLS Committee and Ms. Kruti J. Vora, sought the High Court’s permission to withdraw a special civil application filed against the State of Gujarat and another respondent. The Court granted the request, ordering that the petition be disposed of as withdrawn and that the interim relief pre

GONDAL TALUKA KHARID VEHCHAN SANGH LTDversusKAMAL INDUSTRIES

46-ANY OTHER MODE @ FH

The appellant, Gondal Taluka Kharid Vehchan Sangh Ltd, filed a first appeal against a compensation award of less than Rs.5 lakh. The High Court, after hearing arguments, noted that the amount involved was modest. It held that appeals involving compensation below Rs.5 lakh are not entertained. Consequently, the appeal w

THAKORBHAI NARANJI TANDELversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

40-WITHDRAWN @ FH

The petitioner, Thakorbhai Naranji Tandel, filed a Special Civil Application seeking permission to withdraw the petition because the underlying suit had already been disposed of. The petitioner’s counsel requested that the court allow the withdrawal and vacate the interim relief previously granted. The court examined t

DESAI JAYRAMBHAI GANDABHAIversusTHAKOR NARANJI SAVDHANJI

27-WITHDRAWN @ ADM.STAGE

The petitioner, Desai Jayrambhai Gandabhai, filed a civil application for condonation of delay and subsequently sought the Court's permission to withdraw the petition. The petitioner’s counsel, Mr. Kaivan K. Patel, requested withdrawal under the instructions of the petitioner. The Court granted the permission, disposed

MIHAN MINOR THROUGH NATURAL GUARDIAN PRITI BHAVIK PADIYAversusBHAVIK ARVINDBHAI PADIYA

27-WITHDRAWN @ ADM.STAGE

The petitioners sought the court's permission to withdraw their special civil applications relating to a custody matter (CMA No.108 of 2023). The Hon'ble Justice J.C. Doshi granted the request, ordering the petitions to stand disposed of as withdrawn and discharging the notice. The court clarified that the withdrawal d

REGIONAL DIRECTOR, EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATIONversusKOKILABEN C SHAH

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The Regional Director of the Employees State Insurance Corporation filed an application seeking condonation of delay for a restoration application that had been pending. The court examined the averments and facts presented and decided to condone the delay. Consequently, the restoration application was allowed, restorin

REGIONAL DIRECTOR, EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATIONversusKOKILABEN C SHAH

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The Regional Director of the Employees State Insurance Corporation filed an application seeking condonation of delay for a restoration application that had been pending. The court examined the averments and facts presented and decided to condone the delay. Consequently, the restoration application was allowed, restorin

BHAVIK ARVINDBHAI PADIYAversusPREETI BHAVIK PADIYA

27-WITHDRAWN @ ADM.STAGE

The petitioners, represented by Mr. Maulik M. Soni, sought permission to withdraw their special civil applications (including a direction application) related to a custody matter (CMA No.108 of 2023). The High Court, after hearing counsel for both parties, granted the withdrawal and ordered the petitions to stand dispo

VADILAL CHEMICALS LTDversusSHREE CHETAK INDUSTRIAL SERVICES

46-ANY OTHER MODE @ FH

The High Court of Gujarat examined whether it possessed jurisdiction to hear a first appeal (C/FA/2436/2014) valued at less than Rs.10 lakh. The District Court, under the 2007 scheme, was authorized to decide appeals up to that valuation. The Court concluded that it lacked jurisdiction over the present appeal. Conseque

UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITEDversusROMATBAI AMAD KICHA

35-ANY OTHER MODE @ ADM.STAGE

The appellant, United India Insurance Company Ltd., appealed a Workmen's Compensation award of Rs.3,98,880 plus interest granted to the deceased sailor's dependents after the vessel he was on was hijacked by Somali pirates. The award was made by the Workmen Commissioner in Bhuj without a penalty order, based on the cla

KRUSHNA PRERAK DAVEversusTHE REGISTRAR, FAMILY COURT

27-WITHDRAWN @ ADM.STAGE

Krushna Prerak Dave filed a Special Civil Application before the Gujarat High Court seeking relief in a family suit pending before the Family Court, Gandhinagar. The petitioner, appearing in person, filed a withdrawal pursis on 24‑April‑2026 and requested permission to withdraw the petition while retaining the liberty

THE STATE OF GUJARATversusPATEL DHARMABHAI LAVJIBHAI SINCE DECD. THROUGH LHS

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The State of Gujarat filed a first appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act challenging the compensation award of Rs.1910 per square metre awarded for agricultural land in LAR Case No.112 of 2017. The appeal concerned non‑agricultural land, for which the court applied the settled principle of enhancing compe

KAMLESHBHAI MANSUKHBHAI MANIYARversusMANAGER/OWNER OF VIRAL OXIGEN COMPANY LTD.

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

Kamleshbhai Mansukhbhai Maniyar filed an application before the Gujarat High Court seeking condonation of delay in filing the main civil suit against the manager/owner of Viral Oxygen Company Ltd. The court examined the averments made in the application. No substantive factual dispute was noted. The court found the rea

DEPUTY MANAGERversusJOITARAM BECHARBHAI

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The Deputy Manager appealed against the compensation awarded to Parsottambhai Becharbhai (deceased) and others, claiming a higher amount. The High Court noted that the compensation involved was less than Rs.5 lakh, a relatively small quantum. Considering the low amount, the Court was not inclined to entertain the appea

CHAIRMAN,GUJARAT HOUSING BOARDversusWESTERN BHARAT CONSTRUCTION CO.

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The Chairman of Gujarat Housing Board filed a first appeal against Western Bharat Construction Co. The appellant's counsel, Mr. HS Munshaw, failed to appear before the High Court on both scheduled hearings. The respondent's counsel, Mr. Ekant G. Ahuja, was present. The Court noted the appellant's non‑prosecution of the

THE GROUP GENERAL MANAGAR, ONGCversusLEGAL HEIRS OF PRATHIJI BHAVANJI VAGHELA

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The Group General Manager of ONGC appealed against a compensation award granted to the legal heirs of Prathiji Bhavanj​i Vaghela, contending that the award should be reviewed. The State Government, via a Government Resolution dated 25‑10‑2016, had classified claims up to Rs 5 lakh as petty and directed that such matter

THE GROUP GENERAL MANAGAR, ONGCversusLEGAL HEIRS OF GOBARJI RAVJIBHAI VAGHELA

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The Group General Manager of ONGC appealed against a compensation award granted to the legal heirs of Prathiji Bhavanj​i Vaghela, contending that the award should be reviewed. The State Government, via a Government Resolution dated 25‑10‑2016, had classified claims up to Rs 5 lakh as petty and directed that such matter

SANJAYBHAI VINODBHAI PANDYAversusKHEVNA SANJAYBHAI PANDYA

40-WITHDRAWN @ FH

The appellant, Sanjaybhai Vinodbhai Pandya, filed a first appeal (No.1151 of 2016) and a connected civil application for stay. During the hearing, the appellant’s counsel, Mr. J.A. Adeshra, informed the court that the client wished to withdraw the appeal. The Hon’ble Justice J.C. Doshi ordered that the appeal be dispos

DEPUTY MANAGERversusPARSOTTAMBHAI BECHARBHAI (SINCE DECEASED)

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The Deputy Manager appealed against the compensation awarded to Parsottambhai Becharbhai (deceased) and others, claiming a higher amount. The High Court noted that the compensation involved was less than Rs.5 lakh, a relatively small quantum. Considering the low amount, the Court was not inclined to entertain the appea

EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (NARMADA PROJECT)versusPATEL SHASHIKANTH SHAMALBHAI

43-DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT @ FH

The Executive Engineer (Narmada Project) filed a first appeal (No. 5177 of 2010) against Patel Shashikanth Shamalbhai and another party. The appellant was served with an advocate notice but failed to appear in court, either personally or through counsel, despite the matter being listed on the board multiple times. The

COMMISSIONERversusGAURIBEN PURSHOTTAMBHAI

46-ANY OTHER MODE @ FH

The High Court of Gujarat heard First Appeal No. 874 of 2002 filed by the Commissioner against Gauriben Purshottambhai and others. The matter was previously adjourned on 26 September 2016 because the appellant’s counsel and the respondents’ counsel were absent. On 23 September 2022, only the respondents’ counsel appear

RADHESHYAM RAMCHANDRA SONIversusKHUSHBUBEN W/O VIJAYKUMAR RADHEYSHYAM SONI

40-WITHDRAWN @ FH

The appellant, Radheshyam Ramchandra Soni, filed a first appeal before the Gujarat High Court seeking permission to withdraw the appeal. The appellant's counsel, Ms. Dharti R. Shah, submitted a request for withdrawal. The Court, after considering the application, granted permission to withdraw the appeal. Consequently,

THE SPEACIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICERversusPUNAJI JIVAJI GOHEL

26-DISMISSED @ ADM.STAGE

The Special Land Acquisition Officer filed applications seeking condonation of delay in filing the main matters, which the Court allowed, thereby condoning the delay. The same order also addressed two first appeals (Nos. 1618 and 1619 of 2026) wherein the compensation claimed was below Rs.5 lakh. Relying on a Gujarat S

THE SPEACIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICERversusPUNAJI JIVAJI GOHEL

26-DISMISSED @ ADM.STAGE

The Special Land Acquisition Officer filed applications seeking condonation of delay in filing the main matters, which the Court allowed, thereby condoning the delay. The same order also addressed two first appeals (Nos. 1618 and 1619 of 2026) wherein the compensation claimed was below Rs.5 lakh. Relying on a Gujarat S

THE SPEACIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICERversusRAVJIBHAI GALAJI ZALA

26-DISMISSED @ ADM.STAGE

The Special Land Acquisition Officer filed a civil application for condonation of delay against Ravjibhai Galaji Zala & Anr., who did not appear. The court, noting the small claim amount, condoned the delay and allowed the application. In the accompanying first appeal, the compensation sought was below Rs.5 lakh, which

SHANKAR VIJAY SAW MILLversusHEIRS OF DECD. KANUBHAI FATABHAI SODHA PARMAR

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The case involves the death of Kanubhai Fataji, an employee of Sankar Vijay Saw Mill, who suffered fatal injuries when a belt broke while he was pulling a cart. The Commissioner for Workmen Compensation, Labour Court, Nadiad, awarded compensation of Rs.1,08,445 with interest and penalty under the Employees Compensation

NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTDversusSANKAR VIJAY SAW MILL

39-RULE DISCHARGED/DISMISSED @ FH

The case involves the death of Kanubhai Fataji, an employee of Sankar Vijay Saw Mill, who suffered fatal injuries when a belt broke while he was pulling a cart. The Commissioner for Workmen Compensation, Labour Court, Nadiad, awarded compensation of Rs.1,08,445 with interest and penalty under the Employees Compensation

KUNJALBHAI RATILAL SADATversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The petitioners filed a criminal miscellaneous application seeking condonation of delay in filing after the dismissal of their earlier petition. The Court examined the application and considered whether the delay could be excused. It noted that no record was required regarding the period between dismissal and restorati

LHS OF DECD. NAYAK KESHAVLAL HARJIVANDASversusCOMPETENT OFFICER AND PRANT OFFICER

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The petitioners filed a miscellaneous civil application seeking restoration of their first appeal. The court examined the facts presented in the application. It concluded that the application warranted allowance. Consequently, the first appeal was ordered to be restored to its original file. The restoration is conditio

PRAFULCHANDRA VITTHALBHAI PATELversusSANJAYKUMAR VITTHALBHAI PATEL

46-ANY OTHER MODE @ FH

The Principal Senior Civil Judge in Vadodara rejected an application for probate, prompting the parties to file a first appeal. Under the Gujarat Civil Court Act, such an appeal is maintainable before the District Court, not the High Court. The appellant’s counsel sought transfer of the appeal to the appropriate Distri

UNION OF INDIAversusINDIAN FARMERS FERTILIZERS CO-OPERATIVE LTD

43-DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT @ FH

The Union of India appealed against Indian Farmers Fertilizers Co‑operative Ltd. The court noted that the respondent had not filed the required DS affidavit. The judge directed that if the affidavit is not filed by 5 May 2026, the proceedings will be dismissed for default without further reference to the court. The mat

VITHAL BHANA DOBARIYAversusBHANA LALA DOBARIYA

46-ANY OTHER MODE @ FH

The appellant Vithal Bhana Dobariya filed a first appeal, but the appellant died before the matter could be decided. The appellant's counsel requested that the heirs be given liberty to file an application if they wish. The court granted this liberty and held that, in view of the appellant's death, the appeal stands ab

OIL & NATURAL GAS CORP. LTD.versusTHAKOR GALAJI RAVAJI

43-DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT @ FH

The appellant, Oil & Natural Gas Corp. Ltd., sought an extension of time to bring the legal heirs of the deceased respondent No.1 on record. Respondent No.1 had died, and the court needed to decide whether to allow the appellant further time. The learned advocate for the appellant requested a final opportunity to compl

DEPUTY COLLECTORversusPATEL NARANBHAI VASRAMBHAI

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The Deputy Collector filed applications for condonation of delay and for bringing heirs, which the Gujarat High Court allowed, directing necessary amendments. The State Government had earlier classified claims up to Rs.5 lakh as petty, directing their disposal. In the first appeal, the court noted that the compensation

NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.versusRAMESH MADHAVJI JOSHI (Deceased Through Heirs)

44-PARTLY ALLOWED @ FH

The appellant New India Assurance Co. Ltd. filed a first appeal against the award of compensation to the heirs of the deceased Ramesh Madhavji Joshi, the amount being less than Rs.5 lakh. The High Court observed that the modest quantum of the award did not warrant a detailed hearing and dismissed the appeal on the grou

THE ADDITIONAL SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICERversusPARMAR BALABHAI LALUBHAI

35-ANY OTHER MODE @ ADM.STAGE

The Additional Special Land Acquisition Officer filed a first appeal against Parmar Balabhai Lalubhai. The sole respondent had died, and the appellant's counsel was given three opportunities to list the legal heirs but failed to do so. The court noted the respondent's death and the appellant's inaction. Consequently, t

SPL. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICERversusBADARJI SHAKRAJI

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The State Government, through its Revenue Department, issued a resolution classifying claims up to Rs.5 lakh as petty claims to be disposed of expeditiously. The applicants sought condonation of delay in filing their main matters and filed first appeals challenging compensation awards below Rs.5 lakh. The Court conside

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search