Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/16255/2010 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 16255 of 2010
=========================================================
PARMANAND
LALJIBHAI CHHATBAR & 1 - Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 1 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
KANTILAL CHHATBAR for
Petitioner(s) : 1 - 2.
MS JIRGA JHAVERI, AGP for Respondent(s) :
1,
None for Respondent(s) :
2,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE MD SHAH
Date
: 18/01/2011
ORAL
ORDER
1. By
way of filing this petition under Articles 14 and 227 of the
Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for an
appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the Collector,
Surendranagar District to grant original application of the
petitioners dated 25.8.2009 by way of issuing a new Sanad correcting
the required measurements.
2.
The brief facts of the case are that the present petitioners had
purchased disputed land from one Rameshchandra Popatlal Trivedi in
whose name sanad was issued in 1971. Said Rameshchandra Popatlal
Trivedi had never objected regarding the calculation of the disputed
land. The present petitioners have purchased the said land in the
year 1998 and till date of filing of the petition they have also not
raised any objection.
3. It
is pertinent to note that Rameshchandra Popatlal Trivedi – original
owner has not challenged the order of issuing sanad before the
competent authority which was issued in the year 1971. Thereafter on
making representation, the Collector has conveyed to the present
petitioners that alternative remedy is available to the petitioners
to file appeal against the order passed by competent authority. It
is submitted by learned advocate for the petitioners that as no order
is passed by the competent authority, the petitioners cannot prefer
any appeal before the competent court. It is very difficult to agree
with the submission made by the learned advocate for the
petitioners, but it is an admitted fact that the sanad was issued in
the name of Rameshchandra Popatlal Trivedi in pursuance of the order
passed by the competent court. In view of the same, I do not find any
substance in the petition. Taking into consideration the delay and
laches and as discussed above, the petition deserves to be dismissed
and is summarily dismissed with no order as to costs.
(
M.D. SHAH, J. )
syed/
Top