IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 690 of 2025 ==========================================================

HAJARABEN ABBASBHAI PATEL Versus YUNUSBHAI ABDULHAQ PATEL ==========================================================

Appearance:

MR RITURAJ M MEENA(3224) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 NIYATI D CHAUHAN(9082) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J. C. DOSHI Date : 04/12/2025

ORAL ORDER

1. Present CRA filed u/s 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is directed against the judgment and order dated 30.10.2025 passed by the learned Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad, whereby the learned Small Causes Court directed the petitioner to handover peaceful and vacant possession of the suit premises as mentioned in para 13 of the application within 30 days from the date of the order, failing which, possession warrant u/s 43 of the Presidency Small Cause Court Act, 1882 (in short “the Act”) was ordered to be issued against the petitioner herein and the same was to be implemented by the Bailiff of the Court.

2. The factual aspects of the case are that original applicant Yunusbhai filed an application u/s 41 of the Act seeking issuance of a possession warrant against the petitioner herein for getting vacant and peaceful possession of the suit property. The original applicant also prayed for yearly rack rent of Rs.36,000/- from the opponent and further prayed for permanent injunction in regards to the suit properties, which is a small room situated at ground floor at Jamalpur ward No.1 bearing Sheet No.91, City Survey No.2627 admeasuring 42.64.26 sq mtr equivalent to 51 sq yd having Muni. Ses. No.1844 and 1844/1 (in short “suit property”). The case of the original applicant was that the suit property has been purchased by his mother namely Aminaben through registered sale deed No.5510 on 6.4.1987 and therefore, she was the owner of the suit property. She died on 11.10.2007, as a legal heir and as a son, the original applicant filed application u/s 41 of the Act on the ground that the petitioner herein is the sister of the mother of the original applicant (Masi) and since there exists family relation between the parties, she has been given the suit property on permissive possession, as earlier she was residing at Danilimda in one small room and since she was facing trouble to live peacefully in the earlier premises, deceased Aminaben – mother of the original applicant had given the suit property to the petitioner herein before 30-32 years without charging any rent for consideration and therefore, the original applicant claimed vacant and peaceful possession of the suit property by removing the permission to use the suit property, issued notice on 1.3.2023.

2.1 The written statement was filed by the petitioner herein stating that the application u/s 41 of the Act is not maintainable. The petitioner herein had given pagdi of Rs.17,000/- before 35 years to deceased Aminaben and had paid rent of Rs.125/- to one Daudbhai Patel till 2014. thereafter, although the petitioner sent rent by money order, but, it was not accepted. In nutshell, it is contended that the present petitioner is the tenant of the suit property and thus, proceedings u/s 41 of the Act is not maintainable. To evict the present petitioner, the original applicant was required to file HRP suit since the present petitioner is the tenant.

2.2 The learned Court below framed the issue at Exh.21 permitted both the parties to lead evidence and ultimately, the learned trial Court vide judgment and order dated 3.10.2025 directed the petitioner herein to handover peaceful and vacant possession of the suit property within 30 days from the date of order, failing which, directed to issue possession warrant u/s 33 of the Act.

2.3 Being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment, present petitioner has filed revision before this Court.

3. Learned advocate Mr. Meena for the petitioner seeking admissi