Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

27. It seems that plaintiff has tried to take disadvantage of the internal differences between the land owners who are 16 in numbers, inasmuch as now atleast one of the defendant i.e. Manaben, daughter of Mangalbhai Makanbhai being defendant No.3 in the suit and respondent No.4 in appeal has come forward with a case that Satakhat in question was executed by defendants No.1 to 16 on 17.10.1991 and against the sale consideration of Rs.12,51,000/-, amount of Rs.7,95,000/- was paid by the plaintiff and his brother and Suresh Bhimabhai being beneficiary of agreement to sell as consideration to the land owners. However, she also confirms that documents are concocted. Such stand is because of the dispute amongst the original land owners for which separate suits are filed amongst them, being Special Civil Suit No.268 of 2009 by said Manaben, daughter of Mangalbhai Makanbhai against their co- owner/coparcener as well as against all of relevant persons, who are concerned with the suit properties including present litigants. Such suit is mainly for partition of the ancestral properties, declaration of her rights being legal heirs of Mangalbhai Makanbhai and for cancellation of sale- deed in favour of defendants No.19 to 26 and for injunction. Learned senior counsel Mr.Shalin Mehta is appearing for such defendants and he has argued mainly on the issue of rights of women referring the decision of Apex Court in the case of C. Masilamani Mudaliar & Ors. vs.The Idol of Sri Swaminathaswami Swaminathaswami Thirukoil & Ors. reported in (1996)8 SCC 525, submitting that womens have right to equality of status and opportunity which also forms part of the basic structure of the Constitution, since there is gender based discrimination particularly in respect of property. However, though we respect such observation by the Apex Court and though such litigant is interested in confirmation of stay, so as to confirm stay in their favour in their suit, such aspect shall be taken care of while final determination, but it is clear and certain that such stand is only because of their inter se dispute regarding their share and when such Manaben Mangalbhai has not executed the so-called agreement to sell, her statement on such document would not be much relevant.