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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 7626

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE, J
GURJARI CO. OPERATIVE HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10589 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: MS TRUSHA PATEL, MR BHAVESH BABARIYA
For the Respondents: MR JAYNEEL PARIKH AGP

Errors in notice issuance under relevant tenancy laws can lead to interim relief pending proper legal scrutiny.

Headnote:The statute involved is the Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, particularly Section 63 and 84(c). The case revolves around the cancellation of Entry No.8408 concerning land purchased by the Gurjari Kheti Sahkari Mandali Ltd. after the issuance of appropriate permissions. The court found that the society sought permission solely for Survey No.576. The court issued a notice returnable on 01.09.2025 and granted interim relief as per the prayer in clause 8(c). The key issues included the legitimacy of the notice concerning the other survey numbers and availability of alternative remedies. The court reasons that the proceedings were initiated correctly but allows for the appellant's grievances to be examined in a subsequent appeal if necessary. The result was to permit interim relief pending further court proceedings.

Table of Content
1. arguments about validity of notice and permissions. (Para 1 , 2)
2. court discussions on proceedings and alternative remedies. (Para 3 , 4)
3. court's ruling on interim relief and notice. (Para 5 , 6)

ORAL ORDER

1. Heard the learned senior counsel Ms.Trusha Patel for the petitioner.

2. It is submitted by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner that the Gurjari Kheti Sahkari Mandali Ltd. (Mandali) purchased the land bearing Survey Nos.551 and 574. The said Mandali had initially purchased Survey No.576 at Mouje : Makarba, on 15.11.1993 after obtaining necessary permission under Section 63 of the Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act . Thereafter, the Mutation Entry No.8408 dated 06.04.1998 came to be effected in the revenue record. The promoters of the Mandali converted it into a housing society by the order of the Deputy District Registrar dated 30.09.2005 and the same came to be duly registered. Entry No.9859 dated 10.10.2005 came to be recorded thereafter. That the petitioner received a notice dated 19.03.2025 in Tenancy Case No.31/2003 in respect of lands bearing Survey No.551 and 574. The petitioner filed a reply on merits as well as raised the issue of delay in initiating the proceedings under Section 84 (c) of the Act. By the impugned order, the learned Mamlatdar and Agricultural Land Tribunal, Vejalpur, Ahmedabad, has passed the impugned order canceling the Entry No.8408 dated 06.04.1998 and all subsequent transfers thereafter.

2.1 The learned senior counsel has submitted that in a similar case being the Tenancy Case No.459/2009/Makarba in respect of the same society for another plot, the Mamlatdar and Agricultural Land Tribunal, Daskoi vide order dated 31.07.2012 has dropped the proceedings under section 84(c).

3. The learned AGP Mr. Jayneel Parikh has submitted that in the present case, the society has sought permission only with respect to survey No.576, but the notice in the present case has been issued in respect of Survey No.551 and 574. The learned counsel submits that the proceedings have been correctly initiated. The learned AGP further submits that if the petitioner has any grievance in respect of any contentions not being dealt with by the learned Mamlatdar and Agricultural Land Tribunal, Vejalpur, he has an alternative remedy to appeal before the Deputy Collector within a period of 60 days, which are not yet over.

4. Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner and perused the averments.

5. Issue Notice returnable on 01.09.2025. The learned AGP waives on behalf of both the respondents.

6. In the meantime, there shall be ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause 8(c).

7. Direct service, in addition, is permitted for respondent No.2.

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top