Gujarat High Court High Court

Naginbhai vs Motibhai on 9 April, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Naginbhai vs Motibhai on 9 April, 2010
Author: M.R. Shah,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CA/2130/2010	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CIVIL
APPLICATION - FOR DIRECTION No. 2130 of 2010
 

In


 

SECOND
APPEAL No. 387 of 1980
 

With


 

SECOND
APPEAL No. 387 of 1980
 

 


 

===========================================
 

NAGINBHAI
BAHADURBHAI PATEL. - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

MOTIBHAI
RANCHHODBHAI PATEL - Respondent(s)
 

===========================================
 
Appearance : 
MR
SP MAJMUDAR for
Petitioner(s) : 1, 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3,1.2.4 MR PP MAJMUDAR for
Petitioner(s) : 1, 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3,1.2.4  
MR RS SANJANWALA for
Respondent(s) : 1,1.2.1  
MR DHIRENDRA MEHTA for Respondent(s) :
1.3.1, 1.3.2, 1.3.3,1.3.4
 
===========================================
 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 09/04/2010 

 

ORAL
ORDER

1. Present
application has been preferred by the applicants herein original
respondents in Second Appeal No.387 of 1980 to dispose of main Second
Appeal in terms of order passed by the learned Executing Court in
Execution Application in compromise purshis below Exh.27 dated
17.08.2002.

2. It
is the case on behalf of the applicants that Execution Application
No.5 of 2001 was filed before learned Civil Judge (J.D.), Chikhli for
execution of the decree passed in Regular Civil Suit No.166 of 1973
passed by the learned 2nd Civil Judge (J.D.) dated
29.04.1978, Valsad as well as decree passed in the First Appeal No.61
of 1978. It is submitted that in the said Execution Application there
was compromise between the parties as per compromise purshis dated
17.08.2002 below Exh.27 and on that learned Executing Court passed an
order dated 17.08.2002 and said Execution Application came to be
disposed of. Therefore, it is submitted that in view of above, main
Second Appeal is required to be disposed of.

3. Mr.Dhirendra
Mehta, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the original
appellants has submitted that despite his best efforts he is not in a
position to get instructions from original appellants.

4. In
view of above and without expressing anything on merits in the matter
as well as without expressing anything on merits with respect to
compromise entered into between the parties and considering legality
and validity of consent compromise entered into between the parties,
main Second Appeal No.387 of 1980 is disposed of with a liberty in
favour of the original appellants to revive said Second Appeal in
case of difficulty. Present Civil Application is also disposed of
accordingly.

[M.R.Shah,J.]

satish

   

Top