Gujarat High Court
SCA/646/1980 of DAHIBEN W/O SHANKERBHAI DESAIBHAI Vs BHUPATBHAI ZAVERBHAI PADHIAR on 9 December 1996
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 646 of 1980 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE S.K.KESHOTE ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgements? 2. To be referred to the
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 646 of 1980
For Approval and Signature:
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE S.K.KESHOTE
============================================================
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgements?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?
3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgement?
4. Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder?
5. Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge?
-------------------------------------------------------------- DAHIBEN W/O SHANKERBHAI DESAIBHAI & ORS.
Versus
BHUPATBHAI ZAVERBHAI PADHIAR -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: None present for the Petitioners MR A. HAMEED KURESHI for Respondent
-------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE S.K.KESHOTE Date of decision: 09/12/96
ORAL JUDGEMENT
Heard learned counsel for the respondent and perused the order of Gujarat Revenue Tribunal passed in application no.TEN.B.A.232/79 decided on 6-9-1979.
From the record of rights in V.F. Nos. VII, VIIA and XII it comes out that the lands of Survey No.396/2 were shown to be in possession and cultivation of the father of the respondent from 1960-61 to 1965-66.
So according to the record of rights, the respondent no.1
was in possession of this Survey No.396/2 upto 1965-66.
Though there is a dispute regarding the date upto which the respondent was in possession of the land, but the Tribunal has not committed any error in holding that the delivery of the possession to the petitioner as per the order of the learned Mamlatdar dated 20th September, 1960
was illegal as the said officer has no jurisdiction to hand over the possession of this land in a proceeding under sec.32G of the Act, 1948.
I do not find any illegality or any error in the order made by the Tribunal. The application filed by the respondent under sec. 32PP of the Act, 1947 for the purchase of this land by fixation of the purchase price is maintainable.
In the result, this Special Civil Application fails and the same is dismissed. Rule discharged.
Interim relief, if any, granted by this court stands vacated.
**********
zgs/-