AVNIKA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) "Heard Mr.Shashikant Parmar, learned advocate for the petitioner. According to his submission, Misc. Civil Appeal filed by the petitioner against refusal of an injunction application, when interim injunction prayed for in that appeal was posted for hearing to which not only the petitioner even the defendant Nos.1 and 2 had filed written submissions in connection with injunction application only, the learned Judge has disposed of the Misc. Civil Appeal without it being posted for hearing. From the perusal of the impugned judgment and order, it appears that no opportunity of oral hearing of the appeal is provided to anyone much less to the petitioner - original appellant.

(2.) What is referred to in para-8, page-73 of the impugned order appears to be an oral argument made for consideration of injunction application pending the appeal. Surprisingly, there is no reference to any oral argument being submitted by the learned advocate for the defendant Nos.1 and 2 when they have been referred to even as per the respondents in appeal. The exhibits referred therein clearly reflects that those written arguments in support of the main appeal but it was for the purpose of hearing and considering the injunction application alone.

(3.) Ms. Aishvarya, learned advocate for Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 herein attempted to submit that as per her instructions, main appeal was heard with the consent of the parties.