Gujarat High Court
Honda Car India Limited vs Thakor Shardaben Sursangji W/P ... on 23 December, 2022
Bench: Nikhil S. Kariel
C/SCA/4618/2021 ORDER DATED: 23/12/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4618 of 2021
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR AMENDMENT) NO. 2 of 2022
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4618 of 2021
==========================================================
HONDA CAR INDIA LIMITED
Versus
THAKOR SHARDABEN SURSANGJI W/P THAKOR ANUPJI RAMAJI
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS NISHA OJHA, ADVOCATE with MS ALISH MEHTA, ADVOCATE for M/S
WADIAGHANDY AND CO(5679) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR AB MUNSHI(1238) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
NOTICE ISSUED BY PUBLICATION for the Respondent(s) No. 3,4,5,7,8
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 6
NOTICE UNSERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 10,9
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL
Date : 23/12/2022
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned Advocate Ms. Nisha Ojha for M/s Wadiaghandy and
Company for the petitioner and learned Advocate Mr. A.B. Munshi for the
respondents No. 1 and 2.
2. It appears that some of the respondents have not been served and
whereas the respondents who have been served have chosen not to appear.
3. At the request of the parties, more particularly at the request of
learned Advocate Mr. Munshi appearing for the respondents No. 1 and 2,
the present petition is directed to be listed at 2:30 p.m., more particularly in
view of the fact that while the Civil Application (For Amendment) No.2 of
C/SCA/4618/2021 ORDER DATED: 23/12/2022
2022 was on Board, the main matter was not listed along with the same.
4. Learned Advocate Mr. Munshi for the respondents No. 1 and 2-
original plaintiffs tenders an affidavit of the plaintiffs- respondents No. 1
and 2 dated 22.12.2022, whereby the said respondents inter alia would
submit that they would have no objection, if the judgment and order dated
13.03.2020 and consequential decree drawn therefrom passed in Regular
Civil Suit No. 104 of 2016 (Old No. 82 of 2013) by the learned Principal
Senor Civil Judge, Mandal, is quashed and set aside by this Court. The
respondents No. 1 and 2 would also seek permission to withdraw the said
Civil Suit unconditionally.
5. Learned Advocate Ms. Ojha on behalf of the petitioner would submit
that while the present petitioner was not party to the proceedings before the
learned Trial Court, since the judgment and order, also impinged upon its
rights to the land in question, therefore the petitioner was constrained to
prefer the present petition. Learned Advocate would submit that the present
petitioner had purchased the land in question from the original defendants
No. 7 and 8 who in turn had purchased the land from the original
defendants No. 3 to 6 and who in turn had purchased the land from the
original defendants No. 1 and 2. Learned Advocate would submit that the
original defendants No. 1 and 2 were the owners of the land in question and
C/SCA/4618/2021 ORDER DATED: 23/12/2022
whereas the suit in question i.e. Regular Civil Suit No. 104 of 2016 (Old No.
82 of 2013) had been filed by the respondents No. 1 and 2 - original
plaintiffs in context of a right claimed by the plaintiffs, more particularly the
plaintiffs being the sisters of the defendants No. 1 and 2. Learned Advocate
would submit that since the original plaintiffs have by way of affidavit
declared that they do not wish to contest the proceedings any further and
whereas since they have sought for quashing of the impugned judgment and
order and decree drawn thereupon and whereas since the other respondents,
who were owners of the land at some point of time and who had parted
with the land, which had ultimately been purchased by the present petitioner
and whereas since they had not preferred any litigation with regard to any of
the sale deeds including the sale deed in favour of the present petitioner,
therefore their absence may not be taken into consideration by this Court,
more particularly since the said respondents may not have much of a say in
the dispute between the present petitioner and the respondents No. 1 and 2-
original plaintiffs.
6. In view of the submissions made by learned Advocate Ms. Ojha and
learned Advocate Mr. Munshi and having regard to the affidavit submitted
by learned Advocate Mr. Munshi for the respondents No. 1 and 2- original
plaintiffs, upon a broad consensus and in view of the affidavit, the following
order is passed.
C/SCA/4618/2021 ORDER DATED: 23/12/2022
(1) The judgment and order dated 13.03.2020 passed by the
learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Mandal, in Regular Civil Suit No.
104 of 2016 (Old No. 82 of 2013) is hereby quashed and set aside and
consequential decree drawn thereform is also quashed and set aside.
(2) The present petition stands disposed of, in view of the above
order.
7. The affidavit submitted by learned Advocate Mr. Munshi for the
respondents No. 1 and 2 is directed to be taken on record.
8. In view of the order passed in the main petition, the Civil Application
(For Amendment) No.2 of 2022 would not survive, hence the same is
disposed of accordingly.
(NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J)
BDSONGARA
