IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/FIRST APPEAL NO. 229 of 2026 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE L. S. PIRZADA ==========================================================

Approved for Reporting Yes No ==========================================================

PRADIPBHAI AJAYRAJ MEHTA & ANR.

Versus HEIRS AND LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF DECEASED MOTIBHAI BECHARDAS & ORS.

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

Appearance:

MR ASHISH H SHAH(2142) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE L. S. PIRZADA Date : 17/03/2026

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE L. S. PIRZADA)

1. Heard learned advocate Mr.Ashish H. Shah for the appellants – original plaintiffs.

2. The present appeal is preferred by the appellants – original plaintiffs under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, the “Code”), against the impugned Judgment and Decree dated 24.09.2025 passed by the learned 5^th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural) in Special Civil Suit No.65 of 2020 below Exh.13 whereby, the learned trial Court allowed the application preferred by the original defendant Nos.12 to 14 under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code.

3. Factual matrix of the case are that the present appellants – original plaintiffs had preferred Special Civil Suit No.65 of 2020 against the present respondents – original defendants for declaration, cancellation of the sale deed dated 19.02.2019 and permanent injunction. It is the case of the original plaintiffs that the predecessors- in-title of the defendant Nos.1 to 10 had executed one notarized agreement to sale dated 12.07.1991 in respect of the new tenure land bearing Survey No.579, admeasuring 5463 sq.mtrs. situated at Village: Ognaj, Taluka: Daskroi, District: Ahmedabad and as per the said agreement to sale, sale consideration was fixed at Rs.5 per sq.yrd. and the total sale consideration of the land was fixed at Rs.32,670/- and at the time of executing the agreement to sale, the plaintiffs had paid the amount of Rs.25,000/- to the original owners by cheque on

12.07.1991.

3.1. Further, as per the condition of the agreement to sale, the predecessors of the original defendant Nos.1 to 10, being owners of the land, were required to obtain title clearance certificate from the solicitor that the titles of the suit land were clear and marketable and the original owners were also required to convert the said land from new tenure land to old tenure land and thereafter obtain the sale permission from the competent authority and after obtaining of the said permission, balance payment was to be made to the original land owners. As per the agreement to sale, the time limit was fixed for 3 months for completion of the procedure for obtaining title clearance certificate as well as conversion of the land from new tenure land to old tenure land.

3.2. As per the case of the plaintiffs, the original land owners i.e. predecessors of the defendant Nos.1 to 10, had also issued the receipt on a stamp paper on 30.10.1991 and on the very same day, the predecessors of the defendant Nos.1 to 10 i.e. the original land owners of the suit land had executed the possession agreement and the plaintiffs were put in possession of the land in question. As per the case of the plaintiffs, they had subsequently paid the balance amount of Rs.7,670/- by A/c. Payee cheque dated 06.11.1993 to the original land owners and receipt was also issued on 06.11.1993 by the original owners regarding the same. As per the case of the original plaintiffs, the original land owners had extended the time limit for execution of the sale deed for indefinite period.

3.3. Thereafter, as the defendant Nos.1 to 10 were not complying with the terms and conditions of the agreement to sale and not completing the formalities for converting the suit land from new tenure land