Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/12992/1994 3/ 3 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 12992 of 1994
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
=========================================================
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 ?
=========================================================
ZAVERBEN
WD/O SHANKERBHAI NATHABHAI PATEL & 2 - Petitioner(s)
Versus
JATINBHAI
KANTIBHAI PATEL & 27 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance :
MR
JAYESH M PATEL for
Petitioner(s) : 1 - 3.
NOTICE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 1 - 4,6 -
28.
MR RN SHAH for Respondent(s) : 1,
MR AB MUNSHI for
Respondent(s) : 1,
None for Respondent(s) :
5,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
Date
: 21/10/2010
ORAL
JUDGMENT
1. By
way of this petition, the petitioners have prayed to quash and set
aside the order passed by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal (for short,
“the Tribunal”) in Review Application No. TEN.C.A. 15 of
1994 dated 14.10.1994, whereby, the said application was dismissed
and the judgment and order passed by the Tribunal in Revision
Application No. TEN.B.A. 70 of 1985 dated 31.12.1993, confirming the
orders dated 31.01.1983 of the Mamlatdar & ALT, Borsad and dated
10.10.1984 of the Dy. Collector, Petlad respectively, was confirmed.
2. The
facts in brief are that deceased, Shankerbhai Nathabhai Patel, the
predecessor of the petitioners, was cultivating the lands bearing
survey nos.7, 151/1-A-B, 160/1, 160/3, 267/1/A-B-C, 269/5 & 288/1
of Village Saijpur, Taluka Borsad, District Kaira. In proceedings
initiated u/s.32-G of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act,
the Mamlatdar & ALT held that the deceased was not a ‘tenant’ of
the lands in question, vide order dated 31.01.1983 passed in Tenancy
Case No.40/1979.
3. Against
the said order, Tenancy Appeal No.39/1983 was filed before the Dy.
Collector, Petlad, who dismissed the said appeal, vide order dated
10.10.1984. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioners preferred
Revision Application No. TEN.B.A. 70 of 1985 before the Tribunal. The
Tribunal, vide judgment and order dated 31.12.1993, dismissed the
said revision application. Review Application preferred pursuant to
the said order also came to be rejected vide order dated 14.10.1994.
Hence, this petition.
4. Heard
learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents
on record. After appreciating the evidence on record, the
respondent-authorities found that except the revenue entries, there
is no other evidence on record to show that the deceased, original
applicant, was occupying the land in question as a ‘tenant’. Thus,
his possession as a ‘tenant’ was not believed by the authorities.
Further, the disputed lands were jointly purchased by the deceased,
original applicant along with original opponent no.7. Looking to the
facts of the case and the evidence on record, I am of the view that
the authorities below have rightly not believed the case of the
petitioners. I am in complete agreement with the concurrent findings
recorded by the authorities / Tribunal below and hence, find no
reasons to interfere in this petition.
5. For
the foregoing reasons, the petition is dismissed. Rule is discharged.
Interim relief, if any, stands vacated.
[K.
S. JHAVERI, J.]
Pravin/*
Top