Gujarat High Court
Rajnikant Chunibhai Patel vs Mukesh Bajranglal Bansal on 22 January, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/304/2025 ORDER DATED: 22/01/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL) NO. 304 of 2025
In F/APPEAL FROM ORDER NO. 35352 of 2024
==========================================================
RAJNIKANT CHUNIBHAI PATEL
Versus
MUKESH BAJRANGLAL BANSAL & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR DEVDIP BRAHMBHATT(3490) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR. UTSAV H KHAMAR(14493) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT
Date : 22/01/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard Mr.Devdip Brahmbhatt, learned advocate for the applicant.
2. At the outset, learned advocate Mr.Devdip Brahmbhatt, appearing for the applicant, who has filed the present application seeking leave of this Court to file an appeal from order challenging the impugned judgment order dated 12th February, 2019 passed by City Civil Court No. 22 Ahmedabad in Civil Suit No.284 of 2018, thereby, the property, which claimed to have been owned by the applicant, i.e., Survey No. 174/2 at Narol, Ahmedabad referred in the operative portion of the impugned order, the right of the applicant is serious prejudiced because of the passing of the impugned order. He would submit that due to observations made by the learned trial court in the operative portion qua the property owned by the applicant, revenue entries have been mutated, which seriously affected the right of the applicant, who was never joined in Civil Suit No.284 of 2018, which is essentially filed for the Page 1 of 3 Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Fri Jan 24 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jan 27 21:35:05 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/304/2025 ORDER DATED: 22/01/2025 undefined partition of ancestral properties of the plaintiff/defendant. As the applicant was never joined in the suit, he submits that there is a need arisen to file the present appeal by seeking leave of this court.
3. The operative portion of the impugned order reads as follows:-
"(1) Temporary injunction qua property being survey no.174/2 at Narol for Banakhat holder and one- fourth share of plaintiff in Bungalow situated at Laxminarayan Society, Mouje Vadaj in terms of para 5(A) and 5(B) of the application for interim injunction be issued till final disposal of the suit.
(2) The Notice of Motion qua other properties is rejected. M (3) The present Notice of Motion is accordingly disposed of with no order as to costs."
4. Upon close scrutiny of the impugned order, prima facie, I am of the view that no injunction against the property of Survey No. 174/2 at Narol, Ahmedabad which is alleged to have been owned by the present applicant, has been granted by the trial court. The observations made by the trial court in its operative order are confined to the rights of the Banakhat holder of the property in question, i.e., Survey No. 174/2 at Narol, Ahmedabad and not beyond it. There cannot be an injunction granted by any court in relation to the property without being joined and heard of its original owner.
5. At this stage, learned Advocate Mr.Devdip Brahmbhatt would submit that an appropriate application to be joined as a party as defendant in the suit is already filed by the present applicant. If it be so, the trial court is requested to consider such application in light of the fact that any observation passed by the trial court concerning the rights/interests of the present applicant in relation to his alleged property, i.e., Survey No. 174/2 at Narol is concerned, the applicant is required to be heard at least to that extent.
Page 2 of 3 Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Fri Jan 24 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jan 27 21:35:05 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/304/2025 ORDER DATED: 22/01/2025 undefined
6. It is also open for the applicant to move an appropriate application before the trial court to get the operative portion of the impugned judgment and order dated 12th February, 2019 be clarified, thereby clouds, which are created in relation to the aforesaid property, which is, prima facie, not a suit property described in the original suit be cleared. If such an application will be filed by the present applicant, after giving an opportunity of hearing to all the parties concerned, the trial court is also required to decide such application in accordance with law. Prima facie, I am of the view that such power is available with Civil Court under Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908.
7. With the above observations and directions, the present civil application is disposed of.
8. It is made clear that this court has neither gone into nor examined the merits of the claim raised by the present applicant. The aforesaid observations made by this court are prima facie and tentative and the trial court is permitted to decide the applications of the applicant in accordance with law after giving full opportunity to the concerned parties to be heard. Consequently, the civil application is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs. Registration of F/Appeal From Order No. 35352 Of 2024 may be refused.
(MAULIK J.SHELAT,J) MOHD MONIS Page 3 of 3 Uploaded by MOHD MONIS(HC01900) on Fri Jan 24 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jan 27 21:35:05 IST 2025