Gujarat High Court
Cheharbhai Mahadevbhai Rabari vs State Of Gujarat on 16 October, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/13730/2025 ORDER DATED: 16/10/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13730 of 2025
==========================================================
CHEHARBHAI MAHADEVBHAI RABARI & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR.DARSHAN A. DAVE(7921) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8
MR CHIRAG A PRAJAPATI(8468) for the Respondent(s) No. 5,6,7,8,9
MR JAY BAROT AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4
REFUSED SERVED (N)(10) for the Respondent(s) No. 10
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE
Date : 16/10/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. The learned counsel Mr. Chirag A. Prajapati appearing for the
respondent Nos.5 to 9 has filed an affidavit, which is taken on
record.
2. Rule, returnable forthwith. The learned AGP Mr. Jay Barot
waives service of rule on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 to 4,
whereas the learned counsel Mr. Chirag A. Parajapti waives service
of rule on behalf of the respondent Nos.5 to 9.
3. By consent of the learned counsels for the parties, the present
Special Civil Application is taken up for final disposal today. By the
present Special Civil Application, the petitioners have challenged the
impugned interim order dated 26.09.2025 passed by the respondent
No.2 in Mamlatdar Court Act 5(2) / Case - 05/2025 being in violation
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/13730/2025 ORDER DATED: 16/10/2025
undefined
of principles of natural justice and that the learned Mamlatdar does
not have any power to pass an interim injunction pending the
proceedings before him. In the present case, the facts as recorded
in the order dated 03.10.2025 passed by this Court are not
disputed. The learned counsel for the respondent Nos.5 to 9 also
could not dispute the judgments relied upon by the learned counsel
for the petitioners, wherein it has been held that under Section 5(2)
of the Mamlatdar Courts Act, the Mamlatdar has no jurisdiction to
pass an interim injunction pending the proceedings before him.
4. In view of the settled legal position as enumerated in the
judgment of this Court in the case of Jamadar Suleman
Bachumiya vs. Mahavir Mathadin, reported in 1962 (0) AIJEL-
HC 205382, as well as the judgment of the Bombay High Court in
the case of Shri Sandip Bhagvatrao Bhakare vs. Shri Santosh
Mohanlal Dave and Ors., dated 30.09.2025 in Writ Petition
No. 2713/2021, the impugned interim order dated 26.09.2025
passed by the respondent No.2 in Mamlatdar Court Act 5(2) / Case -
05/2025 is quashed and set aside. The respondent No.2 Mamlatdar
is directed to decide and dispose of the Mamlatdar Court Act 5(2) /
Case - 05/2025 within a period of three months from the date of
receipt of this order.
5. It is clarified that this Court has not gone into the merits of the
case and no opinion is expressed thereon.
6. Mamlatdar Court Act 5(2) / Case - 05/2025 shall be decided on
its own merits in accordance with law after giving due effective
hearing to the parties and thereafter passing a reasoned order
dealing with all the contentions so raised by the parties.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/13730/2025 ORDER DATED: 16/10/2025
undefined
7. The Special Civil Application is accordingly allowed and
disposed of.
Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
No order as to costs.
Direct service is permitted
(ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE, J.)
cmk
