Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CA/5010/2010 3/ 3 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 5010 of 2010
In
SECOND
APPEAL No. 226 of 2007
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 ?
=========================================================
PATEL
RAMILABEN SHIVRAM - Petitioner(s)
Versus
PATEL
MAGANBHAI AMTHARAM & 15 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance :
MR
AJ PATEL for
Petitioner(s) : 1, 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3, 1.2.4,1.2.5
MR MANAV A
MEHTA for Respondent(s) : 1,
None for Respondent(s) : 2,8 - 16.
MR
AB MUNSHI for Respondent(s) : 3 -
7.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
Date
: 13/05/2010
ORAL
JUDGMENT
Rule.
Learned advocate, Shri Manav Mehta, waives service of notice of rule
on behalf of the respondent No.1 who is the main contesting party
and Shri A.B.Munshi, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the
respondent Nos. 3 to 7.
Shri
Manav Mehta, learned advocate has stated at the Bar that proposed
respondents i.e. respondent Nos. 11 and 12 herein who have purchased
the disputed land in question during the pendency of second appeal
are personally present in the Court and they have filed a separate
undertakings through him. He has stated at the Bar that after
necessary formalities are completed and the respondent Nos. 11 and
12 are joined as party respondents to the second appeal, they will
be represented through Advocate and Vakalatnama on their behalf
shall be filed latest by tomorrow.
Present
application has been preferred by the applicants-original appellants
permitting the applicants to join respondent Nos. 11 and 12 herein
as party to the main second appeal as well as civil application for
interim relief therein and for an appropriate order restraining them
from further alienating, transferring the suit land in question
which they have purchased by the registered sale-deed dated 20th
April, 2010.
Shri
A.J.Patel, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicants
seeks permission to delete the respondent Nos. 13 to 16 and does not
press their prayer to join respondent Nos. 13 to 16 as party to the
main second appeal as such, they are confirming parties to the
sale-deed dated 20th April, 2010.
Having
heard learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and as
the application is not opposed by respondent Nos. 11 and 12, who are
personally present in the Court, present application is allowed.
Applicants are permitted to join respondent Nos. 11 and 12 as party
respondents in main second appeal as well as in the civil
application for interim relief therein.
By
way of interim relief, when the respondents more particularly,
respondent Nos. 11 and 12 have purchased the suit property during
the pendency of second appeal and considering the undertakings filed
by respondent Nos. 11 and 12 herein and affidavit filed by the
original respondent no.1 in civil application, respondents more
particularly, respondent Nos. 11 and 12 are hereby restrained from
further alienating, transferring the suit land in question in any
manner whatsoever.
Rule
is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. No costs.
(M.R.SHAH,
J.)
(ashish)
Top