IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SANDEEP N. BHATT, J.
Rajabhai Bhojabhai Mer – Petitioner
Versus
Pravinbhai Meghjibhai and Others – Respondents
Special Civil Application No. 5134 of 2023
Decided On : 24-04-2024
Legal Representative - Civil Procedure Code - Order XXII Rule 3, Order XXII Rule 9 - The court discussed the provisions of Order XXII Rule 3 and 9 of the Civil Procedure Code and the impact of the Covid-19 Pandemic on the limitation period. It found that the petitioner, as the legal representative of the deceased plaintiff, should be impleaded in the suit proceedings and the impugned order was quashed and set aside.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed an application to be joined as a legal representative in a civil suit after the original plaintiff's death. The trial court dismissed the application, leading to the present petition.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner should be considered a legal representative and the trial court erred in not allowing the application. It quashed the impugned order and directed the trial court to proceed with the suit after impleading the petitioner.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner, as the legal representative of the deceased plaintiff, should be impleaded in the suit proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the provisions of Order XXII Rule 3 and 9 of the Civil Procedure Code and considered the impact of the Covid-19 Pandemic on the limitation period. It found that the petitioner should be considered a legal representative and the suit should proceed with the petitioner as a party.
Final Decision: The impugned order was quashed and set aside, and the present petition was allowed. The trial court was directed to proceed with the suit after impleading the petitioner as a party.
ORDER :
1. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned advocate Mr. S.P. Majmudar waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent No. 2.
2. The present petition is filed praying for the following reliefs:
(B) Your Lordships may be pleased pending admission hearing and final disposal of this petition, be pleased to stay the operation, implementation and execution of the impugned order dated 13/02/2023 passed below Exhibit-23 in Special Civil Suit No. 84/2019.
(C) Your Lordships may be pleased to pass such other and further orders as maybe deemed just and proper.”
3. Brief facts of the case are as under:
3.2 Thereafter for the protection of his rights vested in the said land Raja Bhoja Mer had filed Regular Civil Suit No. 27/2013 before the court of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Jamnagar for declaration and permanent injunction. In the meanwhile the power of attorney holder executed a registered sale deed for the said land in favour of Farukh Haji Amad, therefore as per the the power of attorney holder Pravinbhai Meghji and Farukh Haji Amad were joined as party in the said proceedings. In the matter of Regular Civil suit No. 27/2013 the learned 4th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Jamnagar was pleased to grant interim injunction till the hearing of Exh.5 application vide its orders dated 16/11/2018. The above orders dated 16/11/2018 came to be challenged by the defendants before the honourable High Court of Gujarat in CRA No. 499/2019. Wherein the honourable High Court was pleased to grant ad-interim relief till the returnable date. Thereafter the respondent Raja Bhoja expired on 23/9/2020, and the learned advocate appearing for the respondent declared before the honourable court and therefore the advocate for the respondent had requested time so that the legal heirs may be brought on records. Thereafter due to the prevailing pandemic COVID-19 the matter was not listed, and is pending before the honourable High Court at this stage.
3.3 During the period, when the Regular Civil Suit No. 27/2013 was pending before the honourable court, the heirs of Devchand Nathu had made a Release Deed in favour of Pravin Meghi having Release Deed No. 646/15 on 4/11/15. Amongst the authors of the Release Deed, one author Kishorilal had expired on 6/1/2017. Taking advantage of this fact Pravin Meghji had on the basis of the said Release Deed executed Sale Deed No. 908/2018 on 24/9/2018 and sold the said land to Farukh Amad.
3.4 After Raja Bhoja came to know about the above movement he had immediately filed Special Civil Suit No. 84/2019 for declaration and for holding the sale deed null and void and for obtaining permanent injunction, and also prayed for directions so
The amendment to Order XXII Rule 4 of the CPC aims to ensure the continuation and culmination of effective adjudication and to prevent the proceedings from coming to an end summarily due to the death....
An agreement to sell agricultural land without prior permission from the Collector is void and unenforceable under tenancy laws.
When a question arises in a suit for specific performance whether the agreement on which that suit is based is void on the ground that any acquisition made pursuant thereto would contravene or transg....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.