Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Ramanbhai Chaturbhai Prajapati vs State Of Gujarat & on 18 December, 2013

Author: Vijay Manohar Sahai

Bench: Vijay Manohar Sahai

  
	 
	 RAMANBHAI CHATURBHAI PRAJAPATI....Appellant(s)V/SSTATE OF GUJARAT
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	

 
 


	 


	C/LPA/1315/2013
	                                                                    
	                           JUDGMENT

 

 


 
	  
	  
		 
			 

IN
			THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
		
	

 


 


 


LETTERS PATENT APPEAL 
NO. 1315 of 2013
 


 


 
	  
	  
		 
			 

In
			SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO.  16102 of 2013
		
	

 


 


 


With 

 


CIVIL APPLICATION NO.
11747 of 2013
 


  In    

 


LETTERS PATENT APPEAL
NO. 1315 of 2013
 

 

 

FOR
APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE: 

 

 

 

 

 

HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE VIJAY MANOHAR SAHAI
 

 

 

and
 

HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE A.G.URAIZEE
 

 

 

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

 


 
	  
	 
	 
	  
		 
			 

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 ?
			 

 

			
		
		 
			 

 

			
		
	

 

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


RAMANBHAI CHATURBHAI
PRAJAPATI....Appellant(s)
 


Versus
 


STATE OF GUJARAT  & 
16....Respondent(s)
 

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

Appearance:
 

MR
S N SOPARKAR, LD SENIOR COUNSEL assisted by MR PARTHIV B SHAH,
ADVOCATE for the Appellant(s) No. 1
 

MR
NJ SHAH, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 - 4
 

MS
MEGHA JANI, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 17
 

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

 


 


	 
		  
		 
		  
			 
				 

CORAM:
				
				
			
			 
				 

HONOURABLE
				MR.JUSTICE VIJAY MANOHAR SAHAI
			
		
		 
			 
				 

 

				
			
			 
				 

and
			
		
		 
			 
				 

 

				
			
			 
				 

HONOURABLE
				MR.JUSTICE A.G.URAIZEE
			
		
	

 


 

 


Date : 18/12/2013
 


 

 


ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJAY MANOHAR SAHAI) We have heard Mr.S.N.Soparkar, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Parthiv B.Shah, learned advocate appearing for the appellant, Mr.N.J. Shah, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 4 and Ms.Megha Jani, learned advocate appearing for respondent No.17.

This Letters Patent Appeal has been filed challenging the interim order dated 22.10.2013 passed by the learned Single Judge in SCA No. 16102 of 2013.

Mr.S.N.Soparkar, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr.Parthiv B.Shah, learned advocate for the appellant has urged that at all four stages, Circle officer has mutated revenue entry, which has been affirmed by the Deputy Collector in the first appeal, Collector in the second appeal and Special Secretary, Revenue Department in revision. Against these orders, the writ petition was filed, wherein learned Single Judge has granted interim order staying the order passed by the Special Secretary.

The argument is that before the authorities below, the respondents have lost. Therefore, there was no question of grant of any stay order. By the impugned order, it amounts to granting the stay order in favour of respondents though there was no prima facie case in their favour.

On the other hand, Ms.Megha Jani learned advocate for respondent No. 17 has opposed the appeal on the ground that the remedy of the appellant lies in filing application for vacating interim relief before the learned Single Judge. Learned advocate Ms.Megha Jani has tried to argue the matter on merits but since this is an interim order, we are not entertaining the arguments on merits for the reason that if we touch the merits of the case, it will affect the proceedings before the learned Single Judge.

Be as it may, the interest of justice will be served if we request learned Single Judge to decide the writ petition itself on merits at an early date.

This Letters Patent Appeal is disposed of with a request to the learned Single Judge to decide the writ petition on merits preferably within two months, subject to His Lordship's convenience. Ad-interim order granted by the learned Single Judge shall be kept in abeyance.

Learned counsel for the parties agree that they will cooperate in the proceeding before the learned Single Judge.

In view of the disposal of the main appeal, Civil Application also stands disposed of.

(V.M.SAHAI, J.) (A.G.URAIZEE,J) Ashish Tripathi Page 4 of 4