AMRATLAL SOMCHANDBHAI THAKKAR v. KIRTIKUMAR KARSHANDAS SADHU
Case at a glance
Key paragraphs
- Para 33. Having heard learned advocate for the applicant and considering the averments made in the application as well as assurance given by learned advocate for the applicant, the present application deserves to be allowed, which is hereby allowed in terms of paragraph 8(A) of the…
Judgment
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT Date : 27/07/2026 ORAL ORDER
#1. Heard Ms.Poonam Soni, learned advocate for Mr.Zubin Bharda, learned advocate for the applicant.
#2. Ms.Soni, learned advocate would assure that this Court that the office objections will be removed within the time that may be stipulated by this Court.
#3. Having heard learned advocate for the applicant and considering the averments made in the application as well as assurance given by learned advocate for the applicant, the present application deserves to be allowed, which is hereby allowed in terms of paragraph 8(A) of the application, subject to removal of office objections by the applicant on or before
14.08.2026, failing which the matter shall stand dismissed for non-removal of office objection without reference to the Court. Subject to above, the main Second Appeal is ordered to be restored back on its original file. GAURAV J THAKER (MAULIK J. SHELAT, J)
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.