Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
AO/345/2007 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
APPEAL
FROM ORDER No. 345 of 2007
With
CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 12326 of 2007
==========================================
DEVENDRAKUMAR
NATWARLAL BHAVSAR - Appellant(s)
Versus
MOHANLAL
VALLABHBHAI MISTRY & 3 - Respondent(s)
==========================================
Appearance
:
MR DAKSHESH
MEHTA for Appellant(s) : 1,
MR ARPIT A KAPADIA
for Respondent(s) : 1 - 4.
==========================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
Date
: 22/08/2008
ORAL
ORDER
1. The present Appeal from Order
is filed by the appellant-original plaintiff challenging the order
dated 24/08/2007 passed by the learned 4th Additional
Senior Civil Judge, Navsari below Exh. 5 in Special Civil Suit No.
16/2006.
2. Shri Dakshesh Mehta, learned
advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant-original plaintiff has
drawn the attention of the Court to the fact that the application,
Exh. 5 was heard by the learned trial Court and the order was kept
CAV, which came to be pronounced by the learned trial Court below
Exh. 5 on 24/08/2007. With a view to see that if any order is passed
against the respondents-original defendants, the same may become
infructuous, the respondents-original defendants sold the property in
favour of respondent no. 1’s brother’s wife only one day earlier to
the order passed by the learned trial Court dated 24/08/2007. It is
submitted that this shows the conduct on the part of the
respondents-original defendants. Shri Dakshesh Mehta, learned
advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant-original plaintiff has
submitted that in view of the changed circumstances, now the
appellant-original plaintiff will have to submit an appropriate
application before the learned trial Court for joining the subsequent
purchaser as a party defendant and will have to pray for injunction
against her.
3. There is some substance in
what Mr. Dakshesh Mehta, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the
appellant-original plaintiff has submitted.
4. Shri Arpit Kapadia, learned
advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents herein is not in a
position to explain the aforesaid conduct on the part of the
respondents-original defendants in selling the property in favour of
respondent no. 1’s own brother’s wife one day prior to the order
below Exh. 5 came to be pronounced by the learned trial Court.
5. Be that as it may. It will
be open for the present appellant to move an appropriate application
before the learned trial Court for joining the subsequent purchaser
as a party defendant and submit an application for injunction against
her. As and when such applications are made, the learned trial Court
is directed to consider the same in accordance with law and on merits
without, in any way, being influenced by the order passed below Exh.
5 and considering the above facts.
6. With this, the Appeal from
Order is disposed of. Notice is discharged.
CIVIL APPLICATION No.
12326/2007
In view of disposal of the
Appeal from Order, no order on the Civil Application, and the same is
disposed of accordingly.
(M.R. SHAH, J.)
siji
Top