IMPORTANT POINT
The rejection of a civil suit challenging the validity of Wills can impact mutation entries in the revenue record, leading to the restoration of original entries.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard learned Senior advocate Mr. M.S. Shah with learned advocate Mr. A. R. Kadri appearing for the petitioner, learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Jayneel Parikh appearing for the respondents No.1, 2, 3 and 4, learned advocate Mr. Niyant R. Bhimani appearing for the respondents No.5, 6, 7, 8. Despite service of notice, none appears for the respondent No.9.

2. Though there are two separate petitions preferred by the same petitioner, learned senior advocate Mr. M. S. Shah submitted that by way of a Will, different parcels of land were given to the petitioner, for which different entries were mutated and therefore, the revenue proceedings commenced separately in respect of two different entries and therefore, there are two petitions and hence, except for the two different revenue entries as the facts are by and large the same both the matters may be taken up together. Learned advocate Mr. Niyant Bhimani did not dispute the aforesaid submissions and hence, both the matters were taken up together and now being decided today.

3. Since the matter is being heard finally with the consent of learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, issue RULE. Learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Jayneel Parikh waives service of rule on behalf of the respondents No.1, 2, 3, 4 and learned advocate Mr. Niyant R. Bhimani waives service of rule on behalf of respondents No.5, 6, 7, 8. According to learned senior advocate Mr. M. S. Shah, respondent No.9 has never challenged the Will executed in favour of the petitioner and nor she objected to the concerned mutation entry which is a subject matter of dispute between the parties and also considering the fact that despite the notice was served upon respondent No.9, she had not chosen to appear before this Court, the matter is heard in absence of respondent No.9.

4. Brief facts of the petition as stated by learned senior advocate Mr. M. S. Shah assisted by learned advocate Mr. Kadri are stated as under :-

5. For the convenience as the dispute is in respect of mutation entry mutated on the basis of Will, the fact of Special Civil Application No.965 of of 2022 is stated. The only difference in respect of fact in both the petition is that in Special Civil Application No.1283 of 2022 before Entry No.1664 there was entry being Entry No.1663 mutated on the basis of succession whereas in Special Civil Application No.965 of 2022 straightway Entry No.1896 was mutated on the basis of Will.

6. With the aforesaid difference between the facts of the two petitions, the facts of Special Civil Application No.965 of 2022 are as under :-

6.1 The issue pertains to a land bearing Old Survey No.94/2 (New Block/Survey No.362), Old Survey No.94/4 (New Block/Survey No.364), Old Survey No.95/1/E (New Survey No.367) known as Khandhiwadu Khet situated at Village Sarnej, Taluka - Vaghodiya, District - Vadodara, the aforesaid land was purchased by father of the petitioner namely Jayantilal Gandhi and two uncle of the petitioner namely Ochavlal Gandhi and Narendrabhai Gandhi, by way of a registered sale deeds. In respect of land bearing Survey No.94/2 and 95/1/E, mutation Entry No.766 was mutated whereas for a land bearing Survey No.94/4, revenue Entry No.767 was mutated and both the entries were certified on different dates in the year 1977.

6.2 The petitioner's uncle namely Narendrakumar Chaganlal Gandhi died on 17.9.1997 and said Narendrakumar Gandhi married twice but both the wives died in the year 1991 and 1997 respectively. Late Narendrakumar Chaganlal Gandhi was not survived by any other legal heirs.

6.3 Another uncle of the petitioner namely Ochavlal Chaganlal Gandhi was also died on 6.4.1979, leaving behind the only legal heir namely his wife Chandanben Ochavbhai Gandhi and the said Chandanben inherited his entire share from the aforesaid property in favour of the petitioner and therefore, the petitioner became the owner of the share of the land of Ochavlal Gandhi by way of a Will.

6.4 Petitioner's father