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

2005 Supreme(Guj) 353

JAYANT PATEL
JHAVERBHAI SAVJIBHAI PATEL, THROUGH P. O. A. HOLDER – Appellant
Versus
KANCHANBEN NATHUBHAI PATEL – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: A.J.PATEL, A.R.MAJMUDAR, N.K.MAJMUDAR

JAYANT PATEL, J.

( 1 ) LEAVE to delete Respondent No. 7 from Special Civil Application No. 8559/2005.

( 2 ) WITH the consent of the parties, both the matters are taken up for final hearing today and as in both the petitions there are more or less common issues and common challenge, they are being considered together by this common order.

( 3 ) RULE. Mr. A. J. Patel, learned Counsel appears for the private respondents and waives service of notice of Rule. Mr. Mengdey, learned AGP appears for State authorities and waives service of notice of Rule for respondent authorities.

( 4 ) UPON hearing the learned Counsel appearing for the parties, it appears that the common question arise for consideration of the Court is as to whether the entry mutated on the basis of the registered sale deed could have been ordered to be cancelled by the authority in toto or the authority ought to have allowed the revenue entry to be continued with the qualification and clarification that the same would be subject to the outcome of the proceedings of civil suit which is pending before the concerned competent court.

( 5 ) AS such it appears that there is no dispute on the point of the factual aspects regardin








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