Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/2410/2011 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 2410 of 2011
With
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 2421 of 2011
======================================
KALIMARD
& DOST MOHAMMAD MEHMOOD SINCE DECD. THROUGH HEIRS & 8 -
Petitioners
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT THROUGH PRINCIPAL REVENUE & 5 - Respondents
======================================
Appearance :
MR
NV GANDHI for the Petitioners.
MS JIRGA JHAVERI, AGP for
Respondent Nos.1 to 3.
NOTICE UNSERVED for Respondent(s) : 4 -
5.
MR KANABAR FOR MS FARHANA Y MANSURI for Respondent(s) : 6.1 to
6.6.
======================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
Date
: 11/04/2011
ORAL
ORDER
1. As
common question of law and facts arise in both these petitions and
they arise out of common order dated 18/11/2010 passed by the
Secretary, (Appeals), Revenue Department, State of Gujarat in
Revision Application Nos. 1-2/2009, both these petitions are being
disposed of by this common order.
2. As
both these petitions can be disposed of on the broad consensus
between learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective
parties with respect to mutation entries in question, further facts
are not narrated.
3. Having
heard learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective
parties, it appears that the dispute is with respect to mutation
entry Nos.168, 207, 484, 528 and 557 and mutation entry that might
have been made subsequently pursuant to the order dated 13/03/2006
passed by the Deputy Collector, Vyara, District: Surat in RTS Appeal
Nos.33 & 68/2004. As per settled proposition of law laid down by
the Hon’ble Supreme Court as well as this Court in catena of
decisions that mutation entry in the revenue record does not confer
any right, title and interest in favour of the person, whose name is
mutated in the revenue record solely on the ground that his name is
mutated in the revenue record. If there is any dispute with respect
to partition, right and title of the properties, the same is to be
resolved by approaching the concerned Civil Court and necessary entry
be made in the revenue record on the basis of the decision, that may
be rendered by the concerned Civil Court.
4. Learned
advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties are not in
position to dispute the same. It is reported that one Civil Suit is
instituted by the petitioner for permanent injunction. In view of
rival claims between the parties, it will be open for either of the
parties to institute the Civil Suit/Suits in the concerned Civil
Court for establishing their rights in the property in question and
necessary entry be made on the basis of the decision that may be
passed by the concerned Civil Court. However, in the meantime, all
the mutation entry Nos.168, 207, 484, 528 and 557 and even mutation
entry that might have been made/ to be made subsequently pursuant to
the order dated 13/03/2006 passed by the Deputy Collector, Vyara,
District: Surat in RTS Appeal Nos.33 & 68/2004, to be continued
without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the respective
parties in the pending Civil Suit and/or in the Suit that may be
instituted by either of the parties and necessary mutation entries be
made on the basis of the decision that may be passed by the concerned
Civil Court. Merely on the basis of the mutation entries in their
favour, the respective parties may not claim any right, title and/or
interest in the property in question solely on the basis of the
aforesaid mutation entries.
5. It
is ultimately for the concerned Civil Court to pass appropriate order
in the pending Civil Suit and/or in the Suit that may be instituted
by either of the parties, in accordance with law and on merits and on
the basis of the evidence, that may be led by the respective parties
and ignoring the aforesaid mutation entries in question. It goes
without saying that the observations made by the Deputy Collector
and/or the Collector and/or the Revisional Authority may not be
construed as determining the rights between the parties and as stated
hereinabove, the concerned Civil Court to decide and dispose of the
same in accordance with law and on merits and on the basis of the
evidence that may be led by the respective parties and independently.
6. With
these, both these petitions are disposed of. Notice is discharged in
both these petitions. No costs.
[M.R.SHAH,J]
*dipti
Top