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

Durgaben vs Agricultural on 31 July, 2008

Author: R.M.Doshit

Bench: R.M.Doshit

   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CA/201920/2007	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 2019 of 2007
 

In


 

LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL (STAMP) No. 2050 of 2006
 

In
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 23340 of 2005
 

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

 

DURGABEN
INDUPRASAD KACHHIA (THRO.POA KIRTIKUMAR L GANDHI) - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

AGRICULTURAL
PRODUCE MARKET COMMITTEE & 2 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
M.B.GANDHI for
Petitioner(s) : 1, 
None for Respondent(s) : 1 -
3. 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MS. JUSTICE R.M.DOSHIT
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE SHARAD D.DAVE
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 31/07/2008 

 

 
 


 

ORAL
ORDER 

(Per : HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE R.M.DOSHIT) This Application has been taken out by two applicants, namely Himanshu Vrajlal Patel and Kiran Kanubhai Patel, for being substituted for the deceased appellant Durgaben Induprasad Kachhia in the above Letters Patent Appeal (Stamp) No.2050/2006. They claim to be the heirs of the deceased appellant Durgaben Induprasad Kachhia. In support of their claim, the applicants have produced copy of the Will and the Codicil executed by the deceased Durgaben during her life time.

On perusal of the said Will and the Codicil, it appears that the deceased Durgaben had no family of her own. Under the above referred Will, she has bequeathed her properties to several persons including the present applicants. However, under the said Will, one Kirtikumar Laxmanlal Gandhi has been appointed to be the Executor of the Will. In our opinion, right to sue, if any, survives into the Executor Kirtikumar Laxmanlal Gandhi. The present applicants have no locus to be substituted for the deceased appellant.

In above view of the matter, learned advocate Mr.Gandhi seeks leave to withdraw this Application.

Leave is granted. Application stands disposed of as withdrawn.

It is clarified that the withdrawal of this Application will not preclude the Executor of the Will, above referred Kirtikumar Laxmanlal Gandhi, from being substituted for the deceased appellant.

 

 


 

(Sharad
D.Dave, J.)			  (Ms.R.M.Doshit, J.)
 

/moin

    

 
	   
      
      
	    
		      
	   
      
	  	    
		   Top