Gujarat High Court
Kanaksinh Himmatsinh Thakor vs Kapilaben Kadubhai Bhoi on 6 September, 2023
Bench: Aniruddha P. Mayee
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1180/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/09/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1180 of 2023
In
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7192 of 2021
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2022
In
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1180 of 2023
================================================================
KANAKSINH HIMMATSINH THAKOR
Versus
KAPILABEN KADUBHAI BHOI
================================================================
Appearance:
MR PK PANCHOLI(532) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3
for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3,4,5,6
MR NK MAJMUDAR(430) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE
SUNITA AGARWAL
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE
Date : 06/09/2023
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)
1. The appellant herein is vendor of the land in
question, with respect to which the sale deed was executed
in the year 2010. The challenge before the writ-Court was
of an order passed by the revenue authorities in suo moto
proceedings to delete the entry in the the name of the
vendee of the said sale deed, in the year 2019, on the
premise that the land was sold in violation of provisions of
the Bombay Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation
of Holdings Act, 1947.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1180/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/09/2023
undefined
2. The appellant herein, who himself has parted away
with this right, title and interest in the land in question
by executing a sale deed in the year 2010 in favour of the
writ-petitioner, cannot be permitted to challenge the order
passed by the learned Single Judge in setting aside the
decision of the revenue authorities to delete the mutation
entries after a period of 9 years.
3. We may note that the learned Single Judge has taken
note of the fact that a Civil Suit No.1 of 2020 has been
filed by the writ-petitioner which is pending consideration
as regards the claim of the appellant herein namely
respondent No.1 in the writ-petition of subsequent transfer
of the land in question, the remedy before him is to
agitate the said issue before the Civil Court. In any case,
there cannot be any determination of the right of the
vendor the appellant who was vendor of the said sale deed
executed in the year 2010 in favour of the writ-petitioner,
in the writ-proceedings under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India.
4. Further, for the aforesaid, we do not find any merit
in the instant appeal. The appeal is dismissed, accordingly.
However, it is clarified that any of the observations made
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1180/2023 ORDER DATED: 06/09/2023
undefined
hereinabove or the observations made by the learned
Single Judge in the judgment impugned will not come in
the way of the parties in the pending proceedings before
the Civil Court. The Civil Court shall be under obligation
to decide the issue independently without being influenced
by any of the observations made by us.
5. In view of the order passed in main appeal, Civil
Application does not survive and stands disposed of.
(SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ )
(ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE, J.)
Manoj Kumar Rai
