SCA/995720/2008 3/ 3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 9957 of 2008 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================================= GOVARDHAN NATHJI MANDIR TRUST THROUGH ITS TRUSTEES & 4 - Petitioner(s) Versus GANGABEN SHOBHSING DUDHANI & 1 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR MAHENDRA K PATEL for Petitioner(s) : 1 - 5. DS AFF.NOT FILED (N) for Respondent(s) : 1, None for Respondent(s) : 2, MR BHARAT JANI for Respondent(s) : 2.2.1 ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH Date : 02/09/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT
1. By
way of this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,
the petitioners original plaintiffs have prayed for appropriate
writ, order and/or directions, quashing and setting aside the order
dated 01.02.2008 passed by learned 6th Senior Civil Judge,
Patan on application below Ex.33 as well as order dated 18.03.2008
passed by learned 4th Senior Civil Judge, Patan on
application below Ex.35 in Regular Civil Suit No.10 of 2003, by which
learned trial Court has rejected both the application submitted by
petitioners-original plaintiffs to reopen the right to lead evidence.
2. Having
heard Shri M.K.Patel, appearing on behalf of petitioners as well as
Mr.Pranav M.Raval for Shri Bharat Jani, for respondents considering
impugned orders and the time gap between the closing of the right to
lead evidence by the plaintiffs and the applications submitted by the
petitioners original plaintiffs to reopen their right to lead
evidence, the impugned order passed by the learned trial Court
deserves to be quashed and set aside and an opportunity should be
given to the petitioners to lead the evidence.
3. Under
the circumstances and for the reasons stated above, the petition
succeeds. The order dated 01.02.2008, passed by learned 6th
Senior Civil Judge, Patan on application below Ex.33 as well as order
dated 18.03.2008 passed by learned 4th Senior Civil Judge,
Patan on application below Ex.35 in Regular Civil Suit No.10 of 2003
are hereby quashed and set aside and it is ordered to reopen the
right of the plaintiffs to lead the further evidence.
Rule
is made absolute. There shall be no order as to costs.
[M.R.SHAH,
J.]
bddave