Rajesh Mohanlal Bhanushali vs Manjulaben Parsottam Joshi Wd/O ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 17035 Guj

       C/SA/227/2021                                ORDER DATED: 28/10/2021




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                    R/SECOND APPEAL NO. 227 of 2021
                                  With
               CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2021
                   In R/SECOND APPEAL NO. 227 of 2021
=============================================
                  RAJESH MOHANLAL BHANUSHALI
                            Versus
     MANJULABEN PARSOTTAM JOSHI WD/O JOSHI PARSOTTAM SHIVJI
=============================================
Appearance:
DARSHAN M VARANDANI(7357) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7
=============================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI

                             Date : 28/10/2021

                               ORAL ORDER

ORDER IN SECOND APPEAL

1. Draft amendment is allowed. To be carried out within a period of one week.

2. Heard Mr. Hriday Buch, the learned counsel assisted by Mr. Darshan Varandani, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant.

3. The Second Appeal is Admitted considering the following substantial questions of law:

"1. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned District Judge has erred in setting aside the judgment and decree dated 15.12.2014 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Senior Civil Judge, Bhuj-Kachchh in Regular Civil Suit No. 181 of 2007 ?

2. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the plaintiff can succeed on the basis of the weakness of the defendants?

C/SA/227/2021 ORDER DATED: 28/10/2021

3. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned District Judge has erred in shifting the burden of proof upon the defendants?

4. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, non-joinder of other co-owners being the necessary parties is fatal?

5. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the plaintiff proved the legality and validity of the registered sale deed no.467 dated 08.03.1985 at Exh.39 executed by Virabai widow of Varjangbhai Solanki in favour of defendant no.4?

6. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the plaintiff proved the legality and validity of the registered sale deed no.3301 dated 26.08.1991 at Exh. 40 executed by defendant no.4 in favour of the plaintiff, Jayant Jasani and Ajay Jasani?.

7. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the suit is not maintainable as per Section 34 of the specific relief act?

8. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Civil Court has jurisdiction to set aside the orders passed by the revenue authorities and mutation entries?

9. Whether the District Court erred in holding that the family arrangement dated 27.07.1942 (Exh.106) requires compulsory registration under Section 17 of the Registration Act, 1908?

10. Whether the District Court erred in law while that the family arrangement dated 27.07.1942 (Exh.106) is not proved overlooking Section 90 of the Evidence Act?

11. Whether the District Court erred in ignoring the findings of the Revenue Authorities overlooking the provisions contained under Section 135-J of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code, 1879?

12. Whether the District Court erred in law in holding that the plaintiff and his predecessors derived valid title of the suit land?"

C/SA/227/2021 ORDER DATED: 28/10/2021

ORDER IN CIVIL APPLICATION

Issue Notice returnable on 09.12.2021.

In the meantime, parties are directed to maintain the status quo as regards the nature, character and possession of the suit property.

(VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI,J)

NEHA