IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 812 of 2014 With CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 2 of 2014 In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 812 of 2014 With R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 545 of 2014 With CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR BREACH OF ORDER) NO. 1 of 2019 In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 545 of 2014 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI and HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI ==============================================================================

1	Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2	To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3	Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
4	Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India or any order made thereunder ?

==============================================================================

DECD. JAGDEVRAO NARAYANRAO SEVALE. & 1 other(s)

Versus KHANDERAO NARAYANRAO SAVALE & 5 other(s)

==============================================================================

Appearance:

IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.812 of 2014 :

MR JITENDRA M PATEL(620) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,1.1,1.1.1,1.1.2,1.2,2 DECEASED LITIGANT(100) for the Respondent(s) No. 1.1 RULE SERVED BY DS(65) for the Respondent(s) No. 1.1.1,1.1.2,1.1.3,1.2,1.3,1.4,3,4,5,6

NEUTRAL CITATION

undefined

IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.545 of 2014 :

MS TRUSHA K. PATEL for Appellant No.1.1, 1.2 NOTICE SERVED 4.1 to 4.3, 7.3 – 7.4 DELETED 1.1 RULE SERVED 1.4, 2.2 SERVED BY RPAD 1.3 – 6, 7 DECEASED LITIGANT 1, 2.1 MR TILOK J. PATEL for 2.1.1, 2.1.2, 3 MS RADHABEN R BHOI for 1.2, 4.

==============================================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI and HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI Date : 12/01/2021

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER : HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI)

1. These intra-Court appeals are directed against the order dated 31.03.2014 by which the learned Single Judge of this Court refused to invoke the powers under Order 39 Rule 2(A) of the Code of Civil Procedure for the alleged sale of some part of the land of revenue survey Nos.183/1/A and 183/1/B of Village Tarsali, Taluka and District Vadodara. The relevant observations of the learned Single Judge in the order impugned before us are quoted below for ready reference:-

“11. In absence of any specific description of four boundaries of the lands in question and also considering the facts related to difference in area of lands in question referred above, it is very difficult to jump to the conclusion that the opponents herein have committed any breach of the order dated 15.01.2001 passed in Special Civil Application No.236 of 2001 as referred hereinabove, more particularly, when area of the disputed land shown in the impugned order passed by the Tribunal and the area of disputed land mentioned in para-2 of the main petition is not tallied as referred hereinabove. Moreover, on the submissions made by learned advocate Mr. Kazi for opponent No.1.2 to the effect that the lands in question related to both the survey Numbers i.e.

NEUTRAL CITATION

undefined

and which is the agricultural land and is also open and which is more land in area than what has been claimed by the applicants- original petitioners as referred above and the same is in possession of opponents, nothing substantial has been submitted by the learned advocates for the applicants.

12. It is also important to note at this juncture that the date of order passed by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal is 11.12.2000 as shown in the impugned order at Annexure-"N". Considering the fact that, if we refer the order dated 15.01.2001 passed by this Court in Special Civil application No.236 of 2001, the copy of which is at page-21, the same is talking about the order of Tribunal dated 18.12.2000. Prima-facie, there appears typographical error, but on the said order, the applicants-original petitioners have

Click Here to Read the rest of this document