Gujarat High Court
Kanabhai Bhagvanbhai Lathiya vs Bipinbhai Nanubhai Rabari on 29 July, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/9946/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9946 of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✓
==========================================================
KANABHAI BHAGVANBHAI LATHIYA & ORS.
Versus
BIPINBHAI NANUBHAI RABARI & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. MAULIK M SONI(7249) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7
MR MANAN MAHETA(6037) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MS POONAM M MAHETA(11265) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT
Date : 29/07/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. M. B. Rana for learned Advocate Mr. Maulik M. Soni for the petitioners and learned Advocate Mr. Manan Maheta for the respondent No.1.
2. The present writ application is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following reliefs:
"(a) Your lordship may be pleased to admit/allow this petition.Page 1 of 4 Uploaded by MR. NILESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR(HCD0068) on Wed Jul 30 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 30 22:41:06 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/9946/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2025 undefined
(b) Your lordship may be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order and direction and be pleased to quash and set aside order dated 23.06.2025 passed below Exh. 89 in Regular Civil Suit No. 113 of 2015 in the interest of justice.;
(C) Your lordship may be pleased to interim order and be pleased to stay further execution, implementation of order dated 23.06.2025 passed below Exh. 89 in Regular Civil Suit No. 113 of 2015 till final disposal of the main petition.
(E) This Hon'ble Court will be pleased to pass such other and further orders as the nature and circumstances of the case may require."
3. At the outset, learned Advocate Mr. Rana would submit that in an earlier round of litigation, the very same impugned application came to be rejected by the Trial Court, but due to the remand of the matter by the District Court, again the respondent has preferred the similar application for appointment of DILR, which was allowed by the Trial Court vide its impugned order dated 23rd June, 2025 passed below Exh.89 in Regular Civil Suit No.113 of 2015.
4. Learned Advocate Mr. Rana would further submit that there is, in fact, no grievance regarding the appointment of the DLR for the measurement of the land; rather, the real dispute pertains to the four boundaries of the suit land, i.e., the Chaturdisha.
5. It is further submitted that, DILR being a public authority has once prepared the report and submitted before the Court, it Page 2 of 4 Uploaded by MR. NILESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR(HCD0068) on Wed Jul 30 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 30 22:41:06 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/9946/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2025 undefined shall be treated as evidence. In view of the matter, this Court may clarify that such report may be proved in accordance with law.
6. Per contra, learned Advocate Mr. Maheta appearing for the respondent would submit that as such there is no error much less any gross error of law committed by the Trial Court while adjudicating the impugned application and the issue is covered by the decision of this Court in the case of Ramaben Arjanbhai Dangar Versus State Of Gujarat And Ors reported in (2013) 4 G.L.R. 3661.
7. It is further submitted that, during the pendency of the present writ application, the order impugned is already executed by the DILR and submitted its report which is placed below Exh.95 in the aforesaid suit.
8. Nonetheless, learned Advocate Mr. Maheta would submit that if this Court clarifies that the report of DILR is required to be proved in accordance with law, the respondent has no objection for such clarification. Further, learned advocate seeks permission to submit a certified copy of such report. Permission as sought, is granted. The report of DILR dated 16th July, 2025 submitted with the pursis filed below Ex.95 received by the Trial Court on 21st July, 2025 is taken on record.
Page 3 of 4 Uploaded by MR. NILESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR(HCD0068) on Wed Jul 30 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 30 22:41:06 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/9946/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/07/2025 undefined
9. Having heard learned Advocates appearing for the respective parties and after going through the impugned application and the order passed thereon by the Trial Court, this court is of the prima facie view that there is no apparent error on the face of the record, nor any jurisdictional error committed by the Trial Court while allowing the impugned application and appointing DILR who is required to measure the suit land and determine its four corners / sides i.e. Chaturdisha. Nonetheless, it is hereby observed that such report once received by the Trial Court, requires to be proved on record in accordance with law.
10. The report of DILR which is received on the file of the Trial Court in the aforesaid suit at Exh.95 requires to be proved on record in accordance with law.
11. In view of the aforesaid, learned Advocate Mr. Rana appearing for the petitioners does not invite more reasons in the matter. Accordingly, the present writ application is disposed of with the aforesaid observations. No order as to costs.
(MAULIK J.SHELAT,J) Nilesh Page 4 of 4 Uploaded by MR. NILESHKUMAR RAMESHBHAI PARMAR(HCD0068) on Wed Jul 30 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Jul 30 22:41:06 IST 2025