Gujarat High Court
Patel Chamanbhai Laljibhai vs Gujarat Revenue Tribunal on 22 April, 2025
Author: Sunita Agarwal
Bench: Sunita Agarwal
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/317/2025 ORDER DATED: 22/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 317 of 2025
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10419 of 2024
==========================================================
PATEL CHAMANBHAI LALJIBHAI
Versus
GUJARAT REVENUE TRIBUNAL & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR YOGESH G KANADE(3114) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MS. HETAL PATEL, ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the
Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE
SUNITA AGARWAL
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI
Date : 22/04/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and perused the record.
2. The present appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 28.08.2024 passed by the learned single Judge, whereby the writ petition seeking to set aside the interlocutory order dated 07.03.2024 passed by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal on the interim injunction application filed by the petitioner/revisionist has been dismissed.
3. The judgment impugned categorically records that in the order of rejection of the interim injunction application made by the petitioner revisionist, the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal had observed that the land-in- question belongs to the State Government and the revenue entry reflected the name of Vaghghad Gram Panchayat as being occupier of the land. The learned single judge further records that the GRT has also noticed Page 1 of 2 Uploaded by C.M. JOSHI(HC01073) on Fri Apr 25 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 28 22:39:06 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/317/2025 ORDER DATED: 22/04/2025 undefined that the petitioner owned certain lands besides the land-in-question and has no right or interest in the land-in-question, which belongs to the State Government. The order passed by the Tribunal rejecting interim injunction application further records that the petitioner has failed to file any document to prove his entitlement as a land owner. As the petitioner has failed to make out prima facie case and the balance of convenience does not lie in his favour, the learned single Judge has dismissed the writ petition upholding the order of rejection of interim injunction application.
4. On a query made by the Court, the learned advocate for the appellant could only submit that the name of the appellant was expunged from the revenue records by making a correction in the mutation entries, which were long drawn entries in the name of the petitioner or his predecessor. Be that as it may, the question as to the entitlement of the petitioner over the land-in-question or the revenue entries allegedly existing in favour of the petitioner, is one which requires consideration by the Tribunal in the pending matter.
5. We do not find any good ground to interfere in the opinion drawn by the learned single Judge based on the findings of fact returned by the Tribunal in rejecting the interim injunction application.
6. With the above, the instant appeal stands dismissed being devoid of merits. No order as to costs.
(SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ ) (PRANAV TRIVEDI,J) C.M. JOSHI Page 2 of 2 Uploaded by C.M. JOSHI(HC01073) on Fri Apr 25 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 28 22:39:06 IST 2025