Gujarat High Court
Jituben Arjanbhai Satvara ... vs Narsinhbhai Zinabhai Satvara ... on 17 August, 2022
Bench: Umesh A. Trivedi
C/SCA/5956/2020 ORDER DATED: 17/08/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5956 of 2020
======================================
JITUBEN ARJANBHAI SATVARA (deceased)
Versus
NARSINHBHAI ZINABHAI SATVARA (DECD.)
======================================
Appearance:
KAUSHAL H PATEL(9328) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1.1,1.2,1.3
MR SP MAJMUDAR(3456) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1.1,1.2,1.3
for the Respondent(s) No.
2.1,2.2,2.3,2.4,2.5,2.6,2.7,2.7.1,2.7.2,2.7.3,2.7.4,2.8,4
DECEASED LITIGANT for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR KUNTAL A JOSHI(6269) for the Respondent(s) No. 10,11
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No.
3,4.2,4.3,4.4,4.5,5,6,7,8,9
UNSERVED EXPIRED (N) for the Respondent(s) No. 2,4.1
======================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH A. TRIVEDI
Date : 17/08/2022
ORAL ORDER
1. This petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution
of India challenging the order passed below Exhibit-85 dated
16.07.2015 passed by 2nd Additional Senior Civil Judge, Morbi in
Special Civil Suit No. 106 of 2006 as also the order dated
16.11.2019 passed by the appellate Court in Civil Misc. Appeal
No. 12 of 2015.
2. The petitioners are heirs and legal representatives of
deceased Jituben Arjanbhai Satvara - original plaintiff in the
suit. The respondent Nos. 10 and 11, who are defendants No.
C/SCA/5956/2020 ORDER DATED: 17/08/2022
10 and 11 in the suit, submitted pursis Exhibit-73 stating
therein that they shall not sell the property till the final disposal
of the suit and in that terms, Exhibit-5 application came to be
disposed of vide order dated 03.03.2007. Thereafter, vide
application Exhibit-85, the original petitioner - plaintiff had
prayed for injunction against defendant Nos. 10 and 11 that
they be restrained from carrying out any activity other than
agricultural activity with the suit land either themselves or
through any agent, which came to be rejected by the trial
Court by assigning detailed reasons and as submitted by the
learned advocate for the petitioners that defendant Nos. 10
and 11 put up a case that they are not making any
construction over the suit property but in the adjoining land,
and therefore, trial Court rejected their application Exhibit-85.
The appellate Court has also confirmed the finding recorded by
the trial Court below Exhibit-85. It is against both these orders
that this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India
is filed.
3. Learned advocate for the respondent Nos. 10 and 11
submitted that evidence in the suit is already concluded and it
is posted for arguments and judgment.
C/SCA/5956/2020 ORDER DATED: 17/08/2022
4. Considering the concurrent findings of facts recorded by
the trial Court and confirmed by the appellate Court based on
material available before it, when such discretion is exercised,
I see no reason to entertain this petition, more particularly,
when recording of evidence in the suit is already concluded
and matter is posted for arguments and pronouncement of
judgment.
In view thereof, this petition is rejected. Notice
discharged.
(UMESH A. TRIVEDI, J.)
Raj
