Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

DEVAN M DESAI

32 judgments delivered by benches including this judge.

PANCHMAHAL DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITEDversusOCCHAVLAL KESHAVLAL PANCHAL

46-ANY OTHER MODE @ FH

The petitioner, Panchmahal District Co-operative Bank Ltd., filed a special civil application against the widow of its former employee, seeking relief. The parties subsequently reached a settlement whereby the bank agreed to pay Rs.1,55,000 to the widow, Taraben Ochhavlal Panchal, within four weeks. The petitioner’s co

CHIEF OFFICER, SIDHPUR NAGARPALIKAversusBALDEVBHAI VITHALBHAI RATHOD

26-DISMISSED @ ADM.STAGE

The Chief Officer of Sidhpur Nagarpalika filed a series of Special Civil Applications against Shukal Jyotindra Nathalal and others seeking payment of commuted pension amounts. The petitioners argued that the pension had already been paid in some cases, rendering those petitions untenable. The Court examined the status

OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LIMITED THRO CHIEF ENGINEERversusCOMPETENT AUTHORITY

43-DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT @ FH

Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd., through its Chief Engineer, filed three Special Civil Applications (Nos. 14512‑14514 of 2012) against the Competent Authority and another respondent in the Gujarat High Court. The petitioners’ counsel, Mr. Rituj M. Meena, failed to appear before the court even on the third call. Th

OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LIMITED THRO CHIEF ENGINEERversusCOMPETENT AUTHORITY

43-DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT @ FH

Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd., through its Chief Engineer, filed three Special Civil Applications (Nos. 14512‑14514 of 2012) against the Competent Authority and another respondent in the Gujarat High Court. The petitioners’ counsel, Mr. Rituj M. Meena, failed to appear before the court even on the third call. Th

OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LIMITED THRO CHIEF ENGINEERversusCOMPETENT AUTHORITY

43-DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT @ FH

Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd., through its Chief Engineer, filed three Special Civil Applications (Nos. 14512‑14514 of 2012) against the Competent Authority and another respondent in the Gujarat High Court. The petitioners’ counsel, Mr. Rituj M. Meena, failed to appear before the court even on the third call. Th

STATE BANK OF INDIA THROUGH REGIONAL MANAGERversusPATNI VINODBHAI BABUBHAI

43-DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT @ FH

The petitioner, State Bank of India, failed to appear before the High Court despite multiple notices. Consequently, the Court dismissed the petition for non‑prosecution and vacated any interim relief that had been granted. The connected civil application was also disposed of as it could not survive the dismissal of the

THE EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATIONversusM/S N G PROJECTS LIMITED

35-ANY OTHER MODE @ ADM.STAGE

The Employees State Insurance Corporation (ESIC) and others filed a special civil application before the Gujarat High Court challenging an order dated 16 April 2024 passed by the Employees State Insurance (ESI) Court in Application No.21 of 2024. The impugned order had decided certain annexures (Exh.2 and Exh.7) withou

STATE OF GUJARATversusNATVARBHAI RAYSINGBHAI HARIJAN

46-ANY OTHER MODE @ FH

The State of Gujarat filed a petition under Article 226 seeking to quash a Labour Court award that reinstated a workman, Natvarbhai Raysingbhai Harijan, and ordered back wages. The workman was employed as a daily‑wage Rojamdar‑Chowkidar from 1982 until his dismissal in 1989, and the dispute centered on whether he had c

MAHENDRA BABUBHAI BAGDAIversusPRADYUMAN BHANUSHANKAR TRIVEDI

27-WITHDRAWN @ ADM.STAGE

The applicant, Mahendra Babubhai Bagdai, filed a Civil Revision Application No. 111 of 2020 before the High Court of Gujarat. The applicant's counsel sought permission to withdraw the matter, stating it would not survive. The Court, after hearing the request, allowed the withdrawal and ordered the revision application

ABDUL RAZAK SULEMAN TARMHOMAMDversusHEIRS OF PATEL LADHA BHADA

40-WITHDRAWN @ FH

The petitioners filed a civil application to have the legal heirs of two deceased petitioners placed on record, submitting death certificates for the deceased who died on 15‑02‑2025 and 20‑01‑2022. The court examined the averments and found the application to be in order, granting the relief to bring the heirs on recor

ABDUL RAZAK SULEMAN TARMHOMAMDversusPATEL LAKHA BHADA

40-WITHDRAWN @ FH

The petitioners filed a civil application to have the legal heirs of two deceased petitioners placed on record, submitting death certificates for the deceased who died on 15‑02‑2025 and 20‑01‑2022. The court examined the averments and documents and held that the application deserved to be allowed, directing the necessa

JITESHBHAI RAJENDRABHAI KADAMversusJAYRAM CHHAGANBHAI NARIYA

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The petitioner, Jiteshbhai Rajendrabhai Kadam, filed a Civil Revision Application (CRA) No. 686 of 2025 before the High Court of Gujarat seeking permission to convert the CRA into a Special Civil Application (SCA) under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner was represented by Mr. Hareshkumar J. Nihad

L.H. OF DECEASED CHANDULAL GANPATRAMversusKAMLESH BACHOMAL

27-WITHDRAWN @ ADM.STAGE

The petitioners, L.H. of the deceased Chandulal Ganpatram and others, filed a Special Civil Application before the High Court of Gujarat seeking permission to withdraw their petition. The petition sought relief against respondents Kamlesh Bachomal and another. The sole issue before the Court was whether the petition co

SAT SHRI DEVELOPERSversusLHRS OF JASHIBEN SOMAJI THAKOR D/O SHANKARJI JESANGJI THAKOR

DISPOSED AS INFRUCTUOUS

The applicant, Sat Shri Developers & Ors., filed Civil Revision Application No.298 of 2024 seeking relief. After the 11th Additional Senior Civil Judge’s order dated 29‑04‑2026 in the underlying Regular Civil Suit No.449 of 2005 rendered the revision infructuous, the applicant moved to withdraw the revision. The court

GUJARAT STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATIONversusGOPALBHAI RAMSINGHBHAI BHEDI

53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE

The Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation filed an application seeking restoration of a main civil matter that had been dismissed for want of prosecution. The court examined the record and the arguments of counsel. It held that a dismissal for want of prosecution does not bar restoration if a proper application is m

KRUTI D/O SHAILESHBHAI PARIKH W/O BORIS ANDRE GOMESversusBORIS ANDRE GOMES

27-WITHDRAWN @ ADM.STAGE

The petitioner, Kruti, filed Special Civil Application No. 14071 of 2024 in the High Court of Gujarat. Subsequently, the petitioner sought the Court's permission to withdraw the petition. The Court, exercising its inherent jurisdiction, granted the request and dismissed the petition as withdrawn, expressly stating that

BHAVESH PRAVINCHANDRA RAJYAGURUversusBHUMIBEN BHAVESH RAJYAGURU D/O KANTIBHAI PATEL

27-WITHDRAWN @ ADM.STAGE

The applicant, Bhavesh Pravinchandra Rajyaguru, filed a special civil application for restoration and later sought the court’s permission to withdraw the same. The respondent, Bhumiben Bhavesh Rajyaguru, opposed the withdrawal. The court examined whether it could allow the withdrawal of a pending civil application. It

MEENABEN D/O PURSHOTTAMBHAI GANDABHAIversusMEHULBHAI BHARATBHAI CHAVDA

DISPOSED AS INFRUCTUOUS

Meenaben filed a miscellaneous civil application for transfer of a family suit (No.18 of 2024) pending before the Family Court, Botad. The applicant's counsel submitted a xerox copy of the order dated 23.02.2026 showing that the respondent-husband had withdrawn the family suit before the lower court. The applicant argu

NASRUDDIN IBRAHIM MANSURversusGUJARAT STATW WAQF BOARD

26-DISMISSED @ ADM.STAGE

The applicant, Nasruddin Ibrahim Mansur, filed a civil revision seeking relief against the Gujarat State Waqf Board and others. The court observed that the applicant had not filed a direct service affidavit for respondents numbered 3, 4, 7, 8, and 9. The judge directed the applicant to file the required affidavit on or

MUSTAFA MOHAMMAD KAPADIA (DECEASED THRU LEGAL HEIRS)versusNASHRUDDIN GULAM MAHMMAD

43-DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT @ FH

The appellants, legal heirs of the deceased Mustafa Mohammad Kapadia, filed a first appeal in the Gujarat High Court. Service of notice on the appellant was effected on 2 February 2026, but the bailiff report showed that two other appellants were residing abroad. Notice on the respondent could not be served as the addr

USHABEN USHAKANT SHUKLAversusSUDHABEN DEVENDRAKUMAR PATEL

42-RULE DISCHARGED @ FH

The plaintiff sought specific performance of an oral agreement to purchase a suit property consisting of a ground floor and a first floor, alleging full payment of Rs.5,50,000 and possession of the ground floor. The trial court held that the oral agreement existed, the plaintiff had paid consideration to Defendant No.1

JIGNESH YASHESHCHANDRA UPADHYAYversusKALPESH HARIKRISHNA GOR

40-WITHDRAWN @ FH

The petitioner filed a Special Civil Application seeking relief, but later submitted the order of the City Civil Judge showing that the underlying civil suit (No. 819 of 2014) had been settled and withdrawn. The petitioner requested that the present petition be withdrawn in view of the settlement. The Court examined th

YOGESH RUDARJI DESAIversusASPI JAMSHEDJI SANJANA

33-CA DISPOSED OF

The applicant, the original appellant, filed a recall application seeking to set aside the order dated 07.01.2026 in First Appeal 396 of 1999, alleging that respondent No.6 had not been served with an advocate notice. The court noted that respondent No.6, along with respondents 2, 4 and 5, were initially represented by

HATISHBHAI PRABHUDAS CHAUDHARIversusNARANBHAI GHELABHAI RABARI DESAI

27-WITHDRAWN @ ADM.STAGE

The appellant, Hatishbhai Prabhudas Chaudhari, filed an appeal against Order No. 184 of 2023 in the High Court of Gujarat. During the hearing, the appellant submitted the order dated 22 April 2025 passed by the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kalol, in Special Civil Suit No. 58 of 2021. The appellant then requested perm

SANDIPBHAI NARENDRABHAI PATELversusBUNTY BHARATBHAI PATEL

27-WITHDRAWN @ ADM.STAGE

The appellant, Sandipbhai Naren­drabhai Patel, filed an appeal and sought the Court’s permission to withdraw it. The appellant’s counsel requested leave to withdraw, raising the question of whether such permission could be granted and what the consequences of withdrawal would be. The High Court considered the procedura

BHIMABEN WD/O BHAGOJI RAGHOJI UTTEKARversusNANUBHAI RAMANLAL SHAH

38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH

The appellants filed a First Appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923 challenging the Workmen’s Compensation Commissioner’s order rejecting their claim for compensation after the death of Bhagojirao Uttekar, who fell while painting an advertisement board. The deceased was engaged by opponent No.1

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