IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 3 of 2025 In CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR BRINGING HEIRS) NO. 2 of 2025 In F/FIRST APPEAL NO. 39107 of 2025 ==========================================================

VILASKUMAR BABUBHAI DESAI & ANR.

Versus NIGAM RAJESHKUMAR DESAI & ORS.

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

Appearance:

MR ZUBIN F BHARDA(159) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1,2 MR. AKASH R PATEL(6715) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1,2 DECEASED LITIGANT for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 5 HARI K BRAHMBHATT(9070) for the RESPONDENT(s) No.

1,2,3,4,5.1,5.2,5.3 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE L. S. PIRZADA Date : 09/04/2026

IA ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA)

Heard learned advocate Mr. Akash R. Patel for the applicants and learned advocate Mr. Hari K. Brahmbhatt for the respondents.

By this application under section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, the applicant seeks condonation of delay of 734 days caused in filing the captioned Civil Application (For Bringing Heirs) No. 2 of 2025.

Learned advocate Mr. Hari K. Brahmbhatt for the respondents has opposed the present application for condonation of delay by filing affidavit in reply as under:

“3. I state and submit that the factual narration presented by the applicants in their Civil Application is grossly misconceived and suppression of true factual events happening in the course of years. Therefore the chronology of events which has taken place are produced herewith:

A. The opponent No 5 i.e. Manilal Gulabbhai Desai has expired on 21.09.2023.

B. It is to clarify that the applicant had attended the cremation ceremony of the opponent No.05 as he being paternal uncle of the applicant. Further the resendentail address clarifies the fact that both the person i.e. the applicant and the opponent No.05 stay at the walk able distance therefore any happening of the event is immediately communicated to the family members and therefore there is no error of being communicated late or being unaware of the fact that the paternal uncle has expired.

C. Further, the applicant had intentionally preferred this application for condonation of delay by reserving the fact that he was aware of the death of Mr. Manilal and had already taken necessary steps to bring him on record before various other courts and tribunal the applicant had made a false statement before this Hon'ble Court, in para 06 of the present application it is stated that the applicant did not proper opportunity to file application for heirs. It is not correct to say that the applicant has not got the opportunity because the defendant opponent herein in the suit had already filed an application before the Trial Court disclosing the death of Mr. Manilal the said fact depicted from the application dated 11.10.2023 which is along with the death certificate attached with it. A copy of the said application by the defendant- opponent No.03 herein i.e. Chetan @Hemant Ishwarlal Desai is annexed here to and marked as ANNEXURE-01. Further even the said fact is recorded in the rojkam of the said suit and therefore the rojkam recording the said application being received along with the death certificate is shown herein. A copy of the rojkam of Special Civil Suit No. 04 of 2023 is annexed here to and marked as ANNEXURE 02.

D. It is further stated that the applicant herein has first preferred an application for bringing heirs before this Hon'ble Court in First Appeal no 4272 of 2023 the said appeal is arising from Special Civil Suit No. 02 of 2023 which was also rejected under order 7 rule 11 and after the passing of the said order dated 31.08.2023 the applicant had preferred first appeal before this Hon'ble Court. The Civil Application No. 02 of 2023 was bought before this Hon'ble Court on 27.09.2023 for bringing the heirs of the opponent No. 05 who is also opponent - respondent In the First Appea