qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyui opasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfgh jklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvb nmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwer District Court Visit report tyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopas For the Subject of Litigation Management

dfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzx 3/29/2014 Submitted BY: Ravindra Kumar Purohit cvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmq wertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuio Submitted to: Mr. Anant doegoankar and Mr. Marisport A pasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghj klzxcvbnSusumqwertyuiopasdfghjklzx cvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmq wertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuio pasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghj klzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbn mrtyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuio pasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghj

(Mirzapur). Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act (TADA Cases) pertaining to terrorism. The pecuniary jurisdiction of the Court is unlimited in nature as the Gujarat High Court does not have original civil jurisdiction. The Court visit was a fruitful one for me to know the working of Courts and overall litigation management at the District level. revenue. I reached the Court at 11:00 am however. ESTABLISHMENT The City Civil and Sessions Court. Ahmedabad is a District Court which is entrusted with the territorial jurisdiction over the city and urban areas of the Ahmedabad District.INTRODUCTION The District Court visit was made on 29th day of March. Motor Accident Claims. Ahmedabad.e: Fort has been recognized as archeological site by the Archeological Survey of India. The campus of the Court i. It is remarkable that the City Court works in the Bhadra Fort which was the governing headquarter of the then erstwhile ruler Sultan Ahmedshah Badshah. 2014 at the City Civil and Sessions Court (Bhadra). criminal. The City Court has been working since the British era whereby before independence. Bhadra. The Court exercises both original as well as appellate jurisdiction over matters whereby appeals from the Small Causes Court. etc. electricity. the administrative charge of the City Court was transferred to the Gujarat High Court. the Coram of the City Court was limited to two judges. Ahmedabad and other forums are largely heard in the City Court. the Court proceedings were quite mild in the morning hours as it was a working Saturday. The rural area of Ahmedabad District falls within the territorial jurisdiction of the District Court. Ahmedabad which is located quite near to the City Court. The City Court used to work under the supervision of the Bombay High Court before the formation of State of Gujarat in 1960. JURISDICTION The City Court has subject-matter jurisdiction on areas of civil. The Suits are filed in the form . After the formation of the Gujarat State. The visit has been made as an assignment in lieu of my absence in the special guest lecture conducted by Hon‟ble Judge Jyotsna Yagnik on the topic “Session Case Management”.

the matter was adjourned on the demand of the CBI Prosecution Counsel as well as the Defence Counsel Mr.2 the bail application of suspended IPS Mr. 2/2013 CBI Criminal Miscellenous Application No. J.D. OBSERVATIONS OF THE COURT PROCEEDINGS COURT NO. 173(8) of Cr. . Special Crime Branch. The City Court has 20 judges of the District Judge cadre out of which 19 judges have been entrusted with the Sessions cases charge. RC No. 2) In the matter of CBI. As the Metropolitan Court is yet to take cognizance of the additional accused and commit them to Special Court (Court No. Gandhinagar. Vanzara3 was scheduled for hearing on 29th March. Parmar and Ors. 2014 in Ishrat Jahan Encounter 1 2 CBI Session Case No. The Principal Judge of the City Court is Hon‟ble Judge K. etc.. Vanzara vs. The CBI recently filed the supplementary chargesheet against the Former Joint Director of Intelligence Bureau (IB) and other officers of IB arraigning them as additional accused in the case on the basis of further investigation conducted under S. In the matter of D. 23/2014 . Gajjar. Mumbai vs. The jurisdiction of the Special CBI Courts is limited only to CBI prosecution cases pertaining to corruption matters.G.G. 15 judges have been entrusted with the civil cases and 13 judges have been entrusted with the Motor Accident Claims cases as per the „Business Roaster‟ of the City Court. special cases of the Crime Branch Wing and Economic Offences Wing of CBI.of “City Civil Case (CCC)” as the nomenclature of the suits.G. The governing rules of the City Court are the Ahmedabad City Civil and Sessions Court Rules. Bhatt whereas the Additional Principal Judge of the City Court is Hon‟ble Judge Geeta Gopi. 2). D.1 in FIR No. BS1-S-2011-0005-C/2011.2 (Court of Addl. 1961. V.P.K.C. The matter would further proceed after a period of two weeks. The City Court campus also in houses 4 Special CBI Sessions Courts which are specially assigned CBI Courts designated for the entire State of Gujarat by the High Court of Gujarat. Principal Judge and CBI Court No. the matter pertaining to famous Ishrat Jahan Encounter had been scheduled for initiation of the prosecution and trial. CBI (SIT).

Gajjar. 420. Gajjar that the fulcrum of charge-sheet filed by Naroda Police Station did not had sufficient evidence to hold the applicant guilty and secondly. 15 (Hon’ble Judge Shri H. COURT NO.V. Gujarat) Coram: CJI P. the Hon‟ble Court was convinced by stand of Mr. M.D. The bail was granted to co-accused IPS officers by the Supreme Court (Full Bench) on the ground that the trial had not initiated even after seven years of arrest of the accused IPS officers and there was no scope of completion of trial in short time due to which continued incarceration of accused IPS officers would amount to violation of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Parikh vs. The case pertains to commission of offence under S. the applicant Mr. 5 the judgment and order was reserved by the Court on bail application of the applicant. the Court posted the matter on further hearing and allowed the Applicant‟s request for filling the Rejoinder Reply against CBI. 1218/2014 . Applicant‟s Counsel and held that on grounds of parity. Sathasivam J. The Supreme Court held that the doctrine of parity shall be applicable in connected or similar encounter cases.D. 467 and 471 of IPC whereby the Ahmedabad City Police had arrested the applicant before two months and thereafter the applicant has been in judicial custody. D.C. Vora) In the matter of Dr.case. V.. V. 5 Criminal Miscellenous Application No. N. V. Vanzara prima facie appears to be entitled to be released on bail. The CBI Prosecutor submitted the reply to the bail application.B. Ramana and Ranjan Gogoi JJ’s. Accordingly. The Hon‟ble Court granted bail to the applicant accused under custody and upheld the contentions of Applicant‟s Counsel Mr.G. 3 4 Suspended DIG (Border Range.D. Government of Gujarat. kuttchh-Bhuj. 2014 just a day before the scheduled hearing in present case. Gajjar sought time for filling the affidavit-in-reply to the reply of the CBI and pleaded the Hon‟ble Court to post the matter for further hearing as the Supreme Court4 has granted bail to co-accused IPS officers in Sohrabuddin and Tulsiram Encounter Case on 28th March. the applicant had been falsely implicated in a criminal case by the complainants due to pending civil litigation initiated by the applicant against the complainant. Accordingly. The Applicant‟s Counsel Mr.

Applicant‟s Counsel V. The matter somehow was not called for hearing for few years. Aggrieved by the same. The Tribunal finally rendered the decision in favour of respondent claimant bank.000/. The crux of the matter is that the respondent in 2004 had injured the plaintiff and damaged the vehicle of the plaintiff in a motor accident. 714/2010 Motor Accident Claims Petition 416/2005 . The Applicant was the original respondent before the Arbitral Tribunal whereby the claimant (respondents in present case) had initiated arbitration proceedings for recovery of a debt incurred by the applicant. 6 7 Civil Miscellenous Application (DC) No.R. However. the junior for Counsel of the Plaintiff Mr. B.against the respondent. 6 the matter pertained to setting aside of arbitral award under S. The Respondent Bank‟s Counsel and Counsel for the Arbitrator sought time for further hearing. 10 (Hon’ble Judge Shri K. the Applicant has challenged the entire arbitration proceedings as null and void as there was lack of jurisdiction of the Tribunal to try the case and „the failure of applicant to pay the debt on time could not be interpreted to creation of a arbitral dispute‟. and Ors.M. Shah sought an adjournment on the ground of sickness. The Applicant‟s preliminary objection on aspect of jurisdiction of Arbitral tribunal to try the case was rejected by the Tribunal on the ground that there existed a dispute or difference as to financial debts which were indeed subject of arbitration agreement. Raghavbhai Palsana. The Court accordingly fixed the matter for further hearing after one week. 18 (Hon’ble Judge Shri A. The Respondent‟s Counsel Mr. Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd.J. The plaintiff accordingly filed an aggregate claim of ` 10.D. The matter was posted for hearing and final arguments of the plaintiff were to initiate. COURT NO. Gajjar submitted before the Hon‟ble Court the list of authorities comprising of various decisions of Supreme Court and other High Courts which provides the ratio as „the failure of applicant to pay the debt on time could not be interpreted to creation of a dispute or difference triable by the Arbitral Tribunal‟.D. Dasondi) In the matter of Harish Tejsingh vs. 1996. 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act. 7 the case pertained to a motor accident claim by the plaintiff against the respondent.COURT NO. Vanani) In the matter of S.. Sindhi vs.

D. the overall learning experience derived from the Court visit to the City Court was salubrious to me. The Hon‟ble Court accordingly adjourned the matter. . Gajjar considering the demand for adjournment as genuine consented to the request of Plaintiff. Hence.V.