Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
LPA/250/2009 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 250 of 2009
In
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 12767 of 2008
With
CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 2341 of 2009
In
LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 250 of 2009
======================================
MOHANBHAI
RATANJI PATEL & ORS
Versus
DINESHKUMAR
MANILAL PATEL & ORS
======================================
Appearance :
MR
RS SANJANWALA for Appellants
MR DHIRENDRA MEHTA for Respondent
No.1
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for Respondent Nos. 2 - 7, 7.2.2, 7.2.3,
7.2.4, 7.2.5,7.2.6
None for Respondent
No.7
======================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
Date
: 15/06/2010
ORAL
ORDER
:(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI)
1 Present
appeal is filed by the appellants original petitioners of
Special Civil Application No.12767 of 2009 against the judgment and
order dated 17.10.2008 passed by the learned Single Judge in Special
Civil Application No. 12767 of 2009. The writ petition was filed
challenging the order dated 16th May, 2008, passed by the
learned Additional Senior Civil Judge, Surat, in Regular Civil Suit
No. 506 of 1996. By the said order, the learned Civil Judge, in
exercise of powers under Order-1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil
Procedure, directed the plaintiff to join all male descendants
upto three generation and further directed to join illegitimate
children of his father Manilal. The appellants – original
defendants No. 7 to 12 in the suit and all of whom are co-parceners
in the joint family, were aggrieved by the order passed by the
learned Civil Judge. They had therefore preferred the above
mentioned petition.
2 The
learned Single Judge, after taking into consideration all the
contentions raised by the petitioners, by detailed judgment,
turned down the petition, which judgment is under challenge before
this Court in the present appeal.
3 We
find that the learned Civil Judge exercising the discretionary
powers had ordered joining of certain defendants as necessary
parties in the suit. Learned Single Judge, after examining the
order passed by learned Civil Judge, has refused to interfere with
the discretionary exercise of powers by the Civil Judge. We see no
reason to interfere with the orders under challenge. Further, we
find that the suit is pending since 1996 and we desire that the
same comes to an end at the earliest.
4 In
view of above facts and circumstances, without interfering with the
orders passed by the learned Single Judge as well as the learned
Civil Judge, it is directed that the pending Civil Suit, being
Regular Civil Suit No. 506 of 1996, be disposed of by the learned
Civil Judge as early as possible and preferably within six months
from the receipt of order of this Court. Both the sides shall
cooperate with the Civil Court in bringing an early end to the suit.
It is further clarified that the suit shall be decided on the
evidence that may be brought on record and all defences shall be
open to the present appellants.
5 With
the aforesaid observations, the Letters Patent Appeal stands disposed
of. Civil Application also stands disposed of. Notices in Letters
Patent Appeal and Civil Application stand discharged.
(S.J.
MUKHOPADHAYA, C.J.)
(AKIL
KURESHI, J.)
pnnair
Top