Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CA/8635/2008 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CIVIL
APPLICATION - FOR ORDERS No. 8635 of 2008
In
SECOND
APPEAL (STAMP NUMBER) No. 99 of 2008
=========================================================
BALUBHAI
NARSINHBHAI PATEL - Petitioner(s)
Versus
PARSOTTAMBHAI
NARSINHBHAI PATEL & 6 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MS
SONAL D VYAS for
Applicant(s) : 1,
RULE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 1 - 4, 4.2.2,
4.2.3, 4.2.4,4.2.5 - 6.
None for Respondent(s) : 4,
- for
Respondent(s) : 0.0.0
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HON'BLE
SMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA KUMARI
Date
: 10/09/2008
ORAL
ORDER
This
application has been filed by the applicant, with a prayer to bring
on record, respondent nos. 4/1 to 4/5, as the heirs and legal
representatives of deceased respondent no.4 ? Govindbhai
Narsinhbhai Patel.
This
Court has issued Rule on 25.7.2008. The endorsement on the board
indicates that the notice of Rule has been served upon respondent
no.7. Ms. Sejal K. Mandaviya, learned counsel appears for
respondent no.7. However, none appears for the other respondents.
I
have heard Ms. Sonal D. Vyas, learned counsel for the applicant and
have perused the averments made in the application.
The
application is accompanied by a copy of the death certificate of the
deceased respondent no.4, indicating that the said Govindbhai
Narsinhbhai Patel, expired on 12.8.2006. The respondent nos. 4/1 to
4/5, as described in the memorandum of parties to the Civil
Application, are the heirs and legal representatives of the deceased
respondent no.4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the
applicant, that the applicant has also preferred Civil Application
No. 5923 of 2008, for condonation of delay in filing the Second
Appeal, in which the Court has issued notice, and only at that
stage, the applicant came to know about the death of respondent
no.4, who could not be served as he had expired.
In
view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the
applicant, the application deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, the
application is allowed. The respondent nos. 4/1 to 4/5 are brought
on record as the heirs and legal representatives of deceased
respondent no.4 ? Govindbhai Narsinhbhai Patel. The necessary
amendment may be carried out in the memorandum of the Civil
Application for condonation of delay, as well as in the Second
Appeal. Rule is made absolute.
(Smt.
Abhilasha Kumari,J)
Jayanti*
Top