SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2003 Supreme(Guj) 395

K.M.MEHTA
RAJENDRASINH BHARATSINH SARVAIYA – Appellant
Versus
KIRITSINH BALVANTSINH JADEJA – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: BHARAT T.RAO, P.M.THAKKAR, PAHVA

K. M. MEHTA, J.

( 1 ) ). RULE. Mr. B. T. Rao, learned advocate for respondent No. 1, waives service of rule. 1. 1 rajendrasinh Bharatsinh Sarvaiya, petitioner, original third party, has filed this Revision Application under Section 115 of the C. P. C. , challenging the judgement and order dated 11. 2. 2002 passed by the Second Joint Civil Judge (S. D.), Bhavnagar - order below Exh. 12 in Regular Civil Suit No. 465 of 2001. The learned Judge by his impugned judgement was pleased to reject the application at Exh. 12 filed by the petitioner for joining as party defendant under the provisions of Order 1 Rule 10 of the C. P. C.

( 2 ) THERE is a property situated at Krishnanagar, near Manekwadi, on Municipal Leasehold plot bearing Survey No. 558-559/b, admeasuring 719. 56 sq. mtr. at Bhavnagar (hereinafter referred to as "the suit property". BACKGROUND OF THE MATTER:

( 3 ) DINESHBHAI Rajaram Makwana and Rajeshbhai Rajaram Makwana purchased the suit property from one Mr. Bhogilal Prahladbhai Patel of Vallabhbhai and Savitaben Patel on 23. 8. 1991 by registered Sale Deed and thereby they became owner of the said suit property. 3. 1 it appears from the record that Shri Dineshbhai Rajaram and


















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top