SCA/7716/2008 1/ 2 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 7716 of 2008 ========================================================= LADKIBEN HARILAL - Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & 8 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR ASIT B JOSHI for Petitioner(s) : 1, 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3,1.2.4 MR SATYAM Y. CHHAYA, AGP for Respondent(s) : 1, None for Respondent(s) : 2 - 9. ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI Date : 07/07/2008 ORAL ORDER
At
all stages, there is gross and inordinate delay in pursuing the
challenge to the revenue entries made by which the petitioners are
aggrieved. Counsel for the petitioners however, submitted that
Division Bench of this Court in case of Babubhai Bhagwanji Mehta
& ors. v/s State of Gujarat Spl. Secretary(Appeals) & ors.,
reported in 2004(1)GLR 532 has held that limitation would start
running from the date of knowledge about the adverse entry and in
case of the petitioners entries were made but were never
communicated to the petitioners.
In
the present case, however, there is further delay compounded by the
petitioners since the Revenue Secretary passed his impugned order on
23.3.1998, to challenge which order the present petition is filed in
the year 2008.
The
petitioners have stated that their mother was being represented
through power of attorney holder and after her demise in the year
2001, the petitioners revived the challenge when they came to know
about such proceedings. Such gross delay of 10 years cannot be
explained in this manner. In any case, it is not in dispute that
predecessor-in-title of the petitioner have instituted a civil suit
to establish the rights over the land in question. Such suit is
still pending and is being pursued by the petitioners. Being a case
of revenue entries, the ultimate decision in the civil proceedings
would govern the right, title and interest of the parties and the
revenue entries would thereafter, be in conformity with the decision
of the Civil Court.
In
view of this, no case is made out for interference. The petition is
therefore, dismissed.
(Akil
Kureshi,J.)
(raghu)