Dismissed

Abhaysang Khatuji Thakor v. State of Gujarat through the Special Secretary (Appeals)

Gujarat HC27 Nov 2018LPA/1424/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Gujarat allowed an application to condone a 93-day delay in filing an appeal. The court subsequently dismissed the Letters Patent Appeal challenging a 2017 order which rejected a revisit of a 1989 land mutation entry due to a 21-year delay and verified procedural adherence by revenue authorities.

What did the court decide?

1. Delay of 93 days in preferring the appeal was condoned. 2. The Letters Patent Appeal was dismissed as bereft of merit. 3. The civil application was disposed of accordingly.

Abhaysang Khatuji Thakor Vs State of Gujarat through the… — Land Acquisition | Gujarat HC (2018)

¶1

C/LPA/1424/2018 ORDER

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶3

R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1424 of 2018

¶4

In SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16067 of 2016

¶5

With

¶6

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1 of 2018 With

¶7

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2 of 2018

¶8

========================================================== ABHAYSANG KHATUJI THAKOR

¶9

Versus

¶10

STATE OF GUJARAT THROUGH THE SPECIAL SECRETARY (APPEALS)

¶11

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

¶12

Appearance:

¶13

MR VISHAL B MEHTA(5319) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1,2,3 for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 2,3,4,5,6

¶14

MS NISHA THAKORE, ASST GOVERNMENT PLEADER/PP(99) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1

¶15

G B PATEL(7818) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 5.1,5.2,5.3,5.4,5.5,7,8 MR.DIPAK B PATEL(3744) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 5.1,5.2,5.3,5.4,5.5,7,8

¶16

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

¶17

CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE ANANT S. DAVE and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV

¶18

Date : 27/11/2018

¶19

ORAL ORDER

¶20

(PER : HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE ANANT S. DAVE)

¶21

ORDER IN CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1 OF 2017

¶22

Heard learned advocates for the applicants.

¶23

This application, under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, is filed by the applicants/appellants to condone delay of 93 days in preferring Letters Patent Appeal for which grounds are stated in paragraphs no. 2 & 3 of the application which are

¶24

Page 1 of 4

¶25

C/LPA/1424/2018 ORDER

¶26

not seriously disputed by learned advocate for the other side. Accordingly, we are inclined to condone the delay of 93 days in preferring appeal. Accordingly, delay of 93 days in filing appeal is condoned. Application is allowed accordingly.

¶27

ORDER IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2 OF 2017

¶28

In this appeal, under clause 15 of the Letters Patent, the challenge is to the oral order dated 08.12.2017 passed in Special Civil Application No. 16067 of 2016 by the learned Single Judge in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In the writ petition, the challenge was to the order dated 22.12.2015 passed by the Special Secretary, Revenue Department (Appeals) in Revision Application whereby order dated 06.06.2012 passed by the District Collector in Revision Appeal No. 298 of 2010 came to be confirmed.

¶29

Certain facts so recorded by the learned Single Judge are not in dispute that Entry No. 2144 which was mutated on 02.05.1989 qua Survey Nos. 155, 157, 158, 194, 195/P, 196, 199/3, 199/5, 168/2 and 182/1 situated at village Tragad, Taluka City District Ahmedabad for which grievances are raised by the petitioners as well as their predecessors by filing an appeal before the competent authority in the year 2010. Thus, such belated awakening of the petitioners qua the above entries after 21 years and grounds of challenge were considered by the Collector in his order dated 06.06.2012 whereby certain facts are also recorded by verifying original records of the case that after drawing the panchnama,

¶30

Page 2 of 4

¶31

C/LPA/1424/2018 ORDER

¶32

signatures of the occupier/s were received in presence of Talati on the notice under Section 135-D of the Bombay Land Revenue Code and therefore together with belated challenge on such verification appeal came to be dismissed. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the above order a revision application was preferred before the revisional authority whereby various contentions were raised by the revisionists including that no knowledge about signing on the notice under Section 135-D and even deletion of their names from the revenue record. The revisional authority also considered delay of 21 years for challenge to a certified entry as on 02.05.1989 and reverification of record reveals that notice under Section 135-D was duly served upon the petitioners.

¶33

2.1 The learned Single Judge addressed to the above facts including various submissions made by the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the writ petitioners and was convinced that exercise of powers by the revenue authorities below was proper and in absence of any error writ petition came to be dismissed.

¶34

The contentions are raised by learned advocate appearing on behalf of the appellants reiterating about absence of knowledge on their part about deletion of their names and that they are illiterate and not aware about the procedure but at the same time concurrent findings of the authorities below confirmed by the learned Single Judge by exercising powers under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, the fact remains that Entry No. 2144 so certified on 02.05.1989 was after delay of 21 years and the verification and reverification of revenue records pertaining to

¶35

Page 3 of 4

¶36

C/LPA/1424/2018 ORDER

¶37

subject survey numbers by the District Collector reveals that procedure was followed including that of issuance and receipt of notice under Section 135-D of the Bombay Land Revenue Code. We, therefore, find no merit in this appeal.

¶38

Appeal, accordingly, bereft of merit is dismissed. Civil Application also stands disposed of accordingly.

¶39

(ANANT S. DAVE, ACJ)

¶40

(BIREN VAISHNAV, J)

¶41

DIVYA

¶42

Page 4 of 4

Abhaysang Khatuji Thakor v. State of Gujarat through the Special Secretary (Appeals)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhaysang Khatuji Thakor v. State of Gujarat through the Special Secretary (Appeals)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Laxmiben Wd/O Shri Meghnabhai Sondabhai Bharwad Vs Surat Municipal Corporation Thro Municipal Commissioner

Vimalba Hathibhai Dhadhal Vs Dena Bank

Devikanandan Gau Seva Trust Vs Surat Municipal Corporation

Bai Chhagni D/O Valabha Vaniya (Died During the Pendancy of Appeal) Vs State of Gujarat through the Secretary, Revenue Department

Deep Industries Limited Vs Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited through Neelratan Chaudary Deputy General Manager (P)

Akbarbhai Abdulbhai Vijapura Vs State of Gujarat