Gujarat High Court
Surekhaben D/O Chhotabhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat on 12 February, 2025
Author: Sunita Agarwal
Bench: Sunita Agarwal
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/290/2025 ORDER DATED: 12/02/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 290 of 2025
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13298 of 2024
=============================================
SUREKHABEN D/O CHHOTABHAI PATEL & ANR.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
=============================================
Appearance:
MR NV GANDHI(1693) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2
MS. HETAL PATEL, ASST.GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the
Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4
=============================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE
SUNITA AGARWAL
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI
Date : 12/02/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)
1. Heard the learned counsel Mr. N. V. Gandhi for the
appellants and perused the record.
2. The instant appeal is directed against the judgment and order
dated 24.09.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby the
writ petition challenging the orders dated 24.05.2012 passed by
the Mamlatdar, Kamrej in certifying the mutation entry No.1143,
entering the names of private respondents herein, on the basis of
an unregistered family settlement, was dismissed.
3. On the asking of the Court, it is submitted by the learned
counsel for the appellants that indisputably, the appellants are
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/290/2025 ORDER DATED: 12/02/2025
undefined
signatories to the family settlement based on which, mutation entry
No. 1143 dated 24.05.2012 was made.
4. We may simply record that the challenge raised by the
appellants / original petitioners to the order of certifying the
mutation entry dated 24.05.2012 had further been turned down by
the orders dated 06.12.2013 and 07.04.2016 passed by the Deputy
Collector and the Secretary, Revenue Department (Appeals), in the
proceedings drawn in appeal and revision; respectively.
5. The writ petition challenging the order of the Special
Secretary, Revenue Department dated 07.04.2016 and the previous
orders dated 06.12.2013 of the Deputy Collector and 24.05.2012 of
the Mamlatdar certifying the mutation entry was filed in the year
2024. The learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition with
the observation that once the original petitioners have slept over
their rights at these years (seven years), they cannot be permitted
to challenge the order in absence of any sufficient cause being
made out and the delay caused being a mere eye-wash.
6. Adding to the opinion drawn by the learned Single Judge,
suffice it to record that once the appellants are signatories to the
family settlement, based on which the mutation entry No.1143 was
certified by the Mamlatdar on 24.05.2012, they cannot be
permitted to challenge the said entry.
7. Apart from the above, it is further pertinent to note that
Special Civil Suit No.249 of 2014 has been filed by the appellants
challenging the effect of the family settlement, which is pending
consideration before the Civil Court. The contention of the learned
counsel for the appellants that the terms and conditions of the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/290/2025 ORDER DATED: 12/02/2025
undefined
family settlement signed by the appellants have not been honoured
by the private respondents namely the other signatories, cannot be
looked into in the present proceedings, which are arising out of the
revenue entries based on the family settlement.
8. For the reasoning given above, in addition to the findings
returned by the learned Single Judge, we find it fit and proper to
dismiss the present appeal.
9. The present appeal is dismissed, accordingly, being devoid of
merits. No order as to costs.
(SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ )
(PRANAV TRIVEDI,J)
SAHIL S. RANGER
