Gujarat High Court High Court

Taj vs Iqbal on 2 September, 2008

Gujarat High Court
Taj vs Iqbal on 2 September, 2008
Author: M.R. Shah,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/6618/2008	 4/ 4	JUDGMENT 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 6618 of 2008
 

 
 
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 ?
		
	

 

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

 

TAJ
MOHAMMED FAKIR MOHAMMED - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

IQBAL
HUSSEIN MOHAMMED IBRAHIMBHAI & 6 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MRS
NASRIN N SHAIKH for
Petitioner(s) : 1, 
MR ASIFKHAN I PATHAN for Respondent(s) : 1 -
7. 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 02/09/2008 

 

 
 
ORAL
JUDGMENT

By
way of this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,
the petitioner ? original
defendant has prayed for appropriate writ, order and/or directions,
for quashing and setting aside the order passed by the learned
Chamber Judge, Court No.8, City Civil Court, Ahmedabad, below Exh.20
in Civil Suit No.616 of 2008 dated 04.04.2008, by which, the learned
Chamber Judge, Court No.8 of the City Civil Court, Ahmedabad, has
rejected the application submitted by the petitioner ? original
defendant to appoint the Court Commissioner for preparation of
Panchnama and Map of the Chawl, more particularly to consider whether
their latrines in the properties were occupied by respondents No.1 to
7 or not.

2. Considering
the impugned order, it appears that the learned Chamber Judge
dismissed the said application by holding that the dispute is not
regarding existence of toilets in the premises in the occupation of
the plaintiffs and that the plaintiffs have come to the court with a
case that they have a right of using the suit plot for various
purpose as mentioned in the suit. However looking to the
counter-claim, the learned Chamber Judge was not right in observing
that dispute is not regarding existence of toilets in the premises in
the occupation of the plaintiffs. Under these circumstances looking
to their counter-claim, the impugned order passed by the learned
Chamber Judge, Court No.8, City Civil Court, Ahmedabad below Exh.20
in Civil Suit No.616 of 2008 dated 04.04.2008 deserves to be quashed
and set aside.

3.
At this stage, Shri A.I.Pathan, leraned advocate on behalf of
respondents No.1 to 7 has submitted that as such the prayer of the
petitioner ? original defendant for preparation of Panchnama and
Map of the premises was not only of the respondents No.1 to 7 but
other occupants also who are not before the Court. Miss N.N. Shaikh,
learned advocate appearing on behalf of defendant has submitted that
Panchnama of the premises be restricted with regard to the existence
of the toilets in the occupation of the original plaintiff only.

4. Under
these circumstances and for the reasons stated above, the petition
succeeds and the impugned order passed by the learned Chamber Judge,
Court No.8, City Civil Court, Ahmedabad below Exh.20 in Civil Suit
No.616 of 2008 dated 04.04.2008 is hereby quashed and set aside and
the learned trial Judge is directed to appoint the Court Commissioner
to prepare the Panchnama with respect to the existence of the toilets
in the premises in the occupation of the land of original plaintiffs
? respondents No.1 to 7 herein only.

Rule
is made absolute.

In
the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, no order as to
costs.

[M.R.SHAH,
J.]

bddave

   

Top