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

2009 Supreme(Guj) 626

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.A.PUJ
SOMIBEN @ CHIMIBEN D/O NARANBHAI KALABHAI & 1 - Appellants
Versus
UKABHAI NARANBHAI PATEL KARTA OF HUF & 4 - Respondents
APPEAL FROM ORDER No. 275 of 2008 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION No. 13051 of 2008 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION No. 9802 of 2008 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION No. 8962 of 2009 IN APPEAL FROM ORDER No. 275 of 2008
Decided on : 30/11/2009

Advocates appeared:
MR D D VYAS, SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH MR DHAVAL D VYAS for
Appellants.
MR SB VAKIL, SENIOR ADVOCATE with MR SHALIN N MEHTA for
Respondent No. 1.
MR KAMAL TRIVEDI AND MR AJ PATEL with MS K J BRAHMBHATT for
Respondent Nos.2 - 3.
MR S H SANJANWALA, SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH MR DILIP L
KANOJIYA for Respondent No. 4.
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for Respondent No. 5.

Headnote:

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order 39 - Rules 1 and 2 and Order 43, Rule 1(r) - Appellants - original plaintiffs have filed this Appeal challenging the judgment and order passed by the learned Judge, rejecting the application and vacating the ex - parte order of status - quo granted earlier- The appellants have also prayed for the direction to the respondent No.4 not to transfer the property or to part with the same by way of sell, mortgage, gift or transfer or assigning the same in any manner whatsoever to any one and/or not to create any third party rights therein, and that they should not make any development, construction or continue to make development or construction on the property - Appeal - Held, There is nothing on record to indicate that respondent No.4 has carried out any further construction, there is no substance in this Civil Application - Even otherwise, the order of status - quo is now vacated and the respondent No.4 is permitted to carry out the construction and to deal with the property in the manner he likes, on disposal of the Appeal From Order and hence there is no substance in this application and it is accordingly rejected - Plaintiffs not disclosing relevant facts and documents signed by them - Court declined the relief of interim injunction on ground of delay and laches and only directed the defendant to furnish security sufficient to protect interest of plaintiff - Application dismissed.

JUDGMENT

1. The appellants - original plaintiffs have filed this Appeal From Order under Order 43, Rule 1 (r) of Civil Procedure Code challenging the judgment and order dated 06.08.2008 passed by the learned 4th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Surat below an application Exh.5 in Special Civil Suit No.181of 2008 rejecting the application Exh.5 and vacating the ex-parte order of status-quo granted earlier.

2. Civil Application No.9802 of 2008 is filed by the appellants original plaintiffs praying for stay against the impugned judgment and order. The appellants have also prayed for the direction to the respondent No.4 not to transfer the property or to part with the same by way of sell, mortgage, gift or transfer or assigning the same in any manner whatsoever to any one and/or not to create any third party rights therein, and that they should not make any development, construction or continue to make development or construction on the property bearing Revenue Survey No.127/1, Block No.154 which is purchased by the original defendant No.4 pursuant to the document of 05.08.2005 and that a complete status-quo be maintained by the original defendant No.4 as also the defendant Nos.2 & 3 till the pendency and final disposal of the Appeal from Order.

3. Civil Application No.13051 of 2008 is filed by the applicant - original respondent No.4 praying for vacation of interim relief granted by this Court earlier and seeking permission to continue the construction work.

4. Civil Application No.8962 of 2009 is filed by the applicants - original plaintiffs under Order 39, Rule 2 (A) of the Civil Procedure Code praying for the direction against the opponent No.4 with regard to detention, imprisonment and/or to take action for willful breach of injunction granted by this Court. The applicants original plaintiffs have also prayed for the direction for demolition of construction made by the appellants and for appointment of Court Commissioner on the compliance of the demolition to be done under the order of this Court.

5. This Court has passed an order on 22.08.2008 staying the impugned order passed by the learned Trial Judge and continued the order of status-quo prevailing during the pendency of the application Exh.5. This Court passed further order on 17.09.2008 issuing notice for final disposal. Thereafter, on 02.04.2009, another order was passed by this Court directing the Registry to place this matter before the Hon'ble Chief Justice so that the matter can be listed before any other appropriate Bench at the earliest. The Court (Coram :-C. K. Buch, J.) has passed the said order on the ground that the Counsels for the parties are pressing for expeditious hearing of the appeal and considering the cause list and number of matters pending with the Court, vis.a.vis. working days, it would not be possible for the Court to hear and decide the matter on merits.

6. This order of the Court was challenged by the respondent No.4 before the Apex Court. The Apex Court vide its order dated 17.08.2009 observed that on 25.05.2009, while issuing notice, the Apex Court had permitted the petitioner to complete the construction of the building at his own risk and cost subject to the decision in the petition. However, by subsequent order dated 06.08.2009, the Apex Court has modified its order and the parties were directed to maintain status-quo. The Court in its final order dated 17.08.2009 directed the parties to approach the High Court for an interim arrangement pending the final decision, if there is likely to be any delay in hearing of the matter. The Court further observed that until the matter is heard by the High Court, the petitioner shall not proceed with the construction and the order of status-quo granted on 06.08.2008 shall continue.

7. It is in the above background of the matter, the Appeal From Order as well as Civil Applications are taken up for final hearing.

8. The brief facts giving rise to the present proceedings are that the land bearing Revenue

























































































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