Gujarat High Court Weekly Round Up: May 9 To May 15, 2022

NOMINAL INDEX Bajaj Finance Ltd. Through Authorised Officer, Aniket Pareshbhai Desai versus Ld. District Collector, Navsari & 1 other(s) Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 154 Vijay Arvind Jariwala Versus Umang Jatin Gandhi Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 155 Godrej Agrovet Limited & 1 Other(S) Versus State Of Gujarat & 1 Other(S) 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 156 Parekh Jaisalkumar Vinodbhai Versus State Of Gujarat 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 157 Dhabriya Polywood Limited Vs Union of India 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 158 Principal Commissioner Versus Reliance Industries 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 159 Vasaya Yunusali Alarakhabhai Versus State Of Gujarat 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 160 Harshad D Santoki S/O Devjibhai Versus State Of Gujarat 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 161 Shree Vikas Co.Op. Bank ltd, (liq.) Through Sunil Laxmanrao Powle v. State Of Gujarat & 2 Other(s) 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 162 Nathiben Lalitbhai Vegada Versus State Of Gujarat 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 163 Panchal Zalakben Hardikbhai D/O Sanjaybhai Bhagubhai Panchal Versus State Of Gujarat 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 164 Leepee Enterprise versus Mehul Industries 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 165 Vijaybhai Punabhai Chavda Versus State Of Gujarat & 13 Other(S) 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 166 Chief Project Manager Versus Firoz Saheb Dargah Through Trustee Shaikh Onali Ismailji Visawaarvala 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 167 Orders/Judgments of the week District Magistrate Not Vested With Adjudicatory Powers U/S 14 SARFAESI Act, Can Only Render Ministerial Assistance To Creditors: Gujarat High Court Case Title: bajaj finance ltd. Through authorised officer, aniket pareshbhai desai versus ld. District collector, navsari & 1 other(s) Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 154 Explaining that under Section 26E of the SARFAESI Act, the secured creditor has the first claim over the sale proceeds of secured assets and that the District Magistrate has to provide assistance under Section 14 to the secured creditor to take possession of the asset, the Gujarat High Court has quashed a communication which prohibited the Petitioner-bank from proceedings against the borrower-company. Can Third Parties To An Arbitration Agreement Be Impleaded As Parties In Proceedings U/S 9 Arbitration Act?: Gujarat High Court Answers Case Title: Vijay Arvind Jariwala Versus Umang Jatin Gandhi Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 155 "In the proceedings of section 11, a person who is not a party to the agreement, has no association in eye of law. On the same footing, a third party cannot be a party in the proceedings under section 9 of the Act for interim measures wherein by very nature of the proceedings, third party cannot be said to have a legal participatory right", the Gujarat High Court has recently observed. The Bench comprising Justice NV Anjaria and Justice Samir Davehas been hearing an application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The application was filed by one partner of a partnership firm (Blue Feathers Infracon) against the other wherein the Petitioner filed the interim application to implead a retired partner of the firm and his wife as respondent parties. Sample Analysis Report Of Central Insecticides Lab U/S 24(4) Of Insecticides Act Is 'Conclusive Evidence': Gujarat High Court Case Title: Godrej Agrovet Limited & 1 Other(S) Versus State Of Gujarat & 1 Other(S) Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 156 The Gujarat High Court has held that the sample analysis report received from the Central Insecticides Laboratory under Section 24(4) of the Insecticides Act, 1968 is a 'conclusive proof' of facts involved. Section 24(4) makes provision for a sampel to be sent for test or analysis to the Central Insecticides Laboratory, which shall file its report within 30 days, in writing, signed by or under the authority of the Director of the Laboratory and the report shall be conclusive evidence of the facts stated therein. Gujarat High Court Directs Wife To Pay ₹10K To Husband As She Deserted Him Over Difference In Their Sub-Castes Case title - Parekh Jaisalkumar Vinodbhai Versus State Of Gujarat Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 157 The High Court directed a woman who deserted her husband under the influence of her family on the ground that he belongs to a different sub casere, to pay Rs. 10,000/- to her husband. "We find it extremely unfortunate that the educated couple needs to end the relationship in such a fashion just because there is a strong resistance on the part of the parents and taken in exert this kind of influence," the Bench of Justice Sonia Gokani and Justice Mauna Bhatt remarked. Bonafide Mistake In Selection Of Wrong ODC Vehicle Type While Generating E-Way Bill: Gujarat High Court Quashes Detention Order Case Title: Dhabriya Polywood Limited Vs Union of India Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 158 The High Court has quashed the detention order as there was a bonafide mistake in the selection of the...

Gujarat High Court Weekly Round Up: May 9 To May 15, 2022

Sparsh Upadhyay

Tags