Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
LPA/843/2010 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 843 of 2010
In
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 4406 of 2009
=================================================
SHANTABEN
DEVSHANKER PARMAR - Appellant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 4 - Respondent(s)
=================================================
Appearance :
MR
NK MAJMUDAR for Appellant(s) : 1,
MS KRINA CALLA ASST. GOVERNMENT
PLEADER for Respondent(s) : 1 - 4.
None for Respondent(s) : 5,
MR
YM THAKORE for Respondent(s) : 5.2.1, 5.2.2, 5.2.3,5.2.4
=================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER
Date
: 27/01/2011
ORAL ORDER
(Per
: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA)
The
land belong to one deceased Hiralal Parshottamdas Patel. He applied
for permission to sell the land to the appellant. By order dated
13.12.1981, the authorities permitted him to sell the land on two
conditions namely, (i) application for use of non-agriculture purpose
should be made within 6 months from the date of transfer of land, and
(ii) the land should be put to non-agriculture use within 3 years
from the date of the order.
2. In
view of such conditional permission, said deceased Hiralal
Parshottamdas Patel sold 35 Gunthas of land in favour of the
appellant on 31.5.1982, but no construction was made over the land
for years together.
3. Under
the Bombay Tenancy & Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 provisions have
been made to withdraw the permission to sell the property or to
cancel the same, if conditions are not fulfilled. Having not
fulfilled the conditions, proceedings under Section 84-C of the
Bombay Tenancy & Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 was initiated by
notice dated 16.11.1985. The matter was challenged and reached
finality upto Supreme Court where the appellant lost.
4. After
having lost in the proceedings under Section 84-C of the Act, after
more than 13 years, the appellant preferred a revision application
under Section 211 of the Bombay Land Revenue Code in the year 2007
against the orders, which were passed on 1.9.1994 and 14.11.1994.
Such application having filed, as the petition being time barred, it
was dismissed, which is also confirmed by the learned Single Judge.
5. We
have heard the counsel for the appellant and Ms. Call, learned AGP,
for the State.
6. It
is not in dispute that the final orders which were passed on 1.9.1994
and 14.11.1994 were not challenged by the appellant for more than 13
years. The proceedings under Section 84-C also reached finality when
appellant lost before the Supreme Court. It is also not in dispute
that no construction has been made on the land in question even till
date. In the facts and circumstances, no relief can be granted. In
absence of any merits, the appeal is dismissed. No costs.
[
S.J.MUKHOPADHAYA, CJ.]
[K.M.THAKER,
J.]
kdc
Top