SHAMBHUBHAI PRAHLADBHAI THAKOR Vs. LAXMIBEN D/O DAHYABHAI PRAHLADBHAI THAKOR
LAWS(GJH)-2021-2-16
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
Decided on February 12,2021

Shambhubhai Prahladbhai Thakor Appellant
VERSUS
Laxmiben D/O Dahyabhai Prahladbhai Thakor Respondents

JUDGEMENT

A.C.RAO,J. - (1.) Both the above-numbered Appeal from Orders arise from the common order dated 28.2.2020 passed below Exh.5 and 41 in Special Civil Suit No.564 of 2017 by the Court of learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Sanand. Since both the Appeal from Orders are arising out of the common order dated 28.2.2020, they are being heard together and are being decided by this common CAV Judgment.
(2.) So far as Appeal from Order No.94 of 2020 is concerned, the appellant Nos.1 to 3 therein are the original defendant Nos.1 to 3 whereas the respondent Nos.1 and 2 are the original plaintiffs and defendant Nos.4 and 4.1 of the Special Civil Suit No.163 of 2015 pending in the Court of Principal Civil Judge, Sanand and so far as Appeal from Order No.77 of 2020 is concerned, the appellant No.1 therein is the original plaintiff, whereas the respondent Nos.1 to 4.2 are the original defendants. The said Special Civil Suit No.163 of 2015 was filed by the plaintiff before the Court of learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural) at Mirzapur, which upon formation of the Court of Senior Civil Judge at Sanand, transferred and re- numbered as Special Civil Suit No.546 of 2017 and is at present pending in the Court of learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Sanand. 2.1 In present order, the plaintiff and defendants are being referred to as per their original status before the learned trial Court in the pending suit proceedings.
(3.) So far as facts, leading to filing of Appeal from Order No.94 of 2020 is concerned, the appellants of the said appeal have stated in their own words that the original plaintiff - respondent No.1 herein has preferred Special Civil Suit No.163 of 2015 (new number being Special Civil Suit No.546 of 2017) seeking relief of partition, declaration and perpetual injunction before the Court of learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Sanand against the appellant herein - original respondent No.2. 3.1 It is the case of the plaintiff that suit land situated at Block No.18 paiki admeasuring total H.R.A. 06-02-98 sq. mts. of Changodar, taluka Sanand, district Ahmedabad is an ancestral property which was originally owned by Prahladbhai Chakubhai. Prahladbhai Chakubhai expired on 16.12.1978. The suit land was ancestral and undivided property. It is further case of the plaintiff that her name was never mutated in the revenue record and the name of present appellant No.1 was mutated in the revenue record vide revenue entry No.1729 on 23.5.1989, without mutating the name of the mother of the plaintiff. The plaintiff claims to be daughter of Dahyabhai Thakor who pre- deceased his father Prahladbhai Chakubhai. Accrdingly, the plaintiff has prayed for grant of 1/5th share in the suit land viz. 12060 sq. mts. out of the total land admeasuirng 60,298 sq. mts. 3.2 That the original plaintiff - respondent No.1 had preferred application seeking interim injunction vide Exh.5 against the appellants herein to restrain the appellant from dealing or alienating the suit land in any manner till the final disposal of the suit. The original defendant Nos.4 to 4.1 had also preferred application at Exh.41 seeking interim injunction against the original plaintiff. It is also submitted that the learned trial Court had allowed application at Exh.5 and 41 vide order dated 15.6.2017. Being aggrieved, the present appellant and the respondent No.2 had preferred Appeal from Order No.316 of 2017 and Appeal from Order No.264 of 2017 respectively before this court and both the matters were heard together and vide judgment and order dated 21.1.2020, the appeals came to be allowed and the impugned order dated 15.6.2017 was quashed and set aside and the matter was remanded back for fresh consideration. 3.3 It is also stated that the learned trial Court after fresh consideration of the applications at Exh.5 and 41 has been pleased to allow relief prayed in Exh.5 and Exh.41 came to be rejected vide common order dated 28.2.2020. Accordingly, the interim injunction came to be granted qua the present appellant whereas the interim injunction qua the respondent No.2 herein was vacated by the learned trial Court. The appellants being aggrieved by the same, preferred present appeal. ;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.