Gujarat High Court
Ramanlal Maneklal Bhatt Expired, Poa ... vs Legal Heirs Of Vasudev Maneklal Bhatt ... on 9 February, 2024
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SA/396/2023 ORDER DATED: 09/02/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SECOND APPEAL NO. 396 of 2023
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2023
In R/SECOND APPEAL NO. 396 of 2023
==========================================================
RAMANLAL MANEKLAL BHATT EXPIRED, POA HOLDER OF APPELLANT
NO 1 JAYESHBHAI RAMANBHAI BHATT
Versus
LEGAL HEIRS OF VASUDEV MANEKLAL BHATT LEGAL HEIRS OF
KAUSHIKBHAI VASUDEV BHATT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR KP CHAMPANERI(5643) for the Appellant(s) No.
1,1.1,1.1.1,1.1.1.1,1.1.2,1.1.3,1.2,1.2.1,1.2.2,1.2.3,1.3,1.4,1.5,1.5.1,1.5.2,2,2.
1,2.2
for the Respondent(s) No. 1,1.1,1.2
MR.D K.PUJ(3836) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT
Date : 09/02/2024
ORAL ORDER
1. This second appeal is filed against the judgment
and decree dated 8.2.2023 passed in Regular Civil Appeal
th
Additional District Judge,
Kheda at Nadiad arising from the judgment and decree dated
24.4.2013 passed by the learned 3
rd
Additional Senior Civil
Judge, Nadiad in Regular Civil Suit No.29 of 2007.
2. At the consensus of the parties, the matter is
taken up for final disposal.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SA/396/2023 ORDER DATED: 09/02/2024
undefined
3. The substantial question of law which are required
to be considered, as stated in the present second appeal are
as under:
"(i) Whether the judgment and decree passed by the First
appellate court in Regular Civil Appeal No.79 of 2017
upholding the judgment and decree passed in Regular Civil
Suit No.29 of 2007 is in accordance with the settled
principles of law and evidence on the record?
(ii) Whether the Honourable Court below have committed an
error of law by holding that the suit properties are not
ancestral properties?
(iii) Whether the Honourable Courts below have committed
an error by holding the suit of plaintiff barred by
limitation>
(iv) Whether a claim on ancestral property is maintainable
in the form of a suit for declaration and permanent
injunction?
(v) Whether the suit filed by the appellants herein would be
governed by the provisions of Art.58 of the Limitation Act,
1963 or by the provisions of Art.65 and Art.110 of the
Limitation Act, 1963?"
4. Heard learned advocates for the parties.
5. Learned advocate for the respondents has fairly
stated that he is not inviting admission of the second appeal
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SA/396/2023 ORDER DATED: 09/02/2024
undefined
if the lower appellate court is directed to reconsider the
appeal in accordance with law within a stipulated time
period. Learned advocate for the appellant has also agreed
for the same.
6. Therefore, without giving any further reasons, in
view of the consensus arrived at between the parties, the
impugned judgment and order passed by the learned lower
appellate court being judgment and decree dated 8.2.2023
passed in Regular Civil Appeal No.79 fo 2019 passed by the
th
Additional District Judge, Kheda at Nadiad is hereby
quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded for
reconsideration to the lower appellate Court by giving proper
opportunity to the parties and considering the submission
made by the parties, decide in accordance with law. Such
exercise shall be carried out within three months by the
learned trial court i.e. on or before 15.5.2024. The parties
shall also cooperate in the proceeding and not ask for
unnecessary adjournments.
7. With the above direction the appeal is disposed of.
As the main appeal is disposed of, civil application also
stands disposed of.
(SANDEEP N. BHATT,J)
SRILATHA
