Rajendrabhai Ramanbhai Amin ... vs Bhagvatiben Ramanlal Ghanchi, Lh ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 7123 Guj

       C/SCA/6821/2022                             ORDER DATED: 10/08/2022




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

            R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6821 of 2022

==================================================
    RAJENDRABHAI RAMANBHAI AMIN THROUGH POA HOLDER
              JIGNESHBHAI BHAILALBHAI PATEL
                          Versus
  BHAGVATIBEN RAMANLAL GHANCHI, LH OF LATE NARMADABEN
                    RAMANLAL GHANCHI
==================================================
Appearance:
KHUSHI P JADAV(7351) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
==================================================

  CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH A. TRIVEDI

                              Date : 10/08/2022

                                ORAL ORDER

1.0. This petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the

Constitution of India, challenging the order dated 17.11.2021 passed

by the 06th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Vadodara, below Exhibit -

13 in Special Civil Suit No.92 of 2020, whereby an application given

by the petitioner - plaintiff under Order XII Rule 6 of the Code of

Civil Procedure, 1908, to pass a judgment and decree in favour of the

plaintiff based on the admission of defendant No.2, which came to be

rejected by the concerned Court with an order to pay cost of

Rs.3500/-.

2.0. Heard Mr. Nakul Pradhan, learned advocate for Ms.

Khushi Jadhav, learned advocate for the petitioner.

C/SCA/6821/2022 ORDER DATED: 10/08/2022

3.0. Having heard Mr. Nakul Pradhan, learned advocate for

the petitioner - plaintiff, it is clear that defendant No.2, who has

admitted the claim of petitioner in the plaint, has colluded with the

plaintiff, as alleged by defendant No.1 herein. As observed by the

learned Judge, there is no specific prayer sought for in the suit by the

plaintiff and he has not shown that for the relief claimed in the suit,

there is any specific assertion or claim that he is the owner of the

suit property so as to give the consent or the admission for passing a

decree against himself. If there is a specific prayer in the suit against

the individual defendant and the concerned defendant admits the

claim of the plaintiff, the Court may be able to pass such a decree

based on admission of the concerned defendant qua his right alone.

However, based on admission of one of the defendant, the Court is

not supposed to pass a judgment and decree based on admission of

any of the co-defendant, unless all the defendants admit the claim of

petitioner - plaintiff. Therefore, I see no reason to interfere with the

impugned judgment and order, which is in accordance with law,

while exercising jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of

India. However, the order of cost to be paid by the petitioner -

plaintiff, of Rs.3500, is hereby quashed and set aside as no specific

reason for imposing cost over the petitioner - plaintiff is recorded.

C/SCA/6821/2022 ORDER DATED: 10/08/2022

4.0. In view thereof, this petition stands allowed to the extent

of imposition of cost only and rest of the impugned judgment and

order is hereby confirmed.

(UMESH A. TRIVEDI, J) Lalji Desai