Rajabhai Bhojabhai Mer vs. Pravinbhai Meghjibhai
AI Summary
Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order
Order Issued After Hearing
Purpose:
Case Registered
Listed On:
21 Mar 2023
Original Order Copy
Get a certified copy of this order
Order Text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5134 of 2023
========================================================== RAJABHAI BHOJABHAI MER Versus PRAVINBHAI MEGHJIBHAI
========================================================== Appearance: MR SHALIN MEHTA, SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH MS KRUPALI N BHATT(9455) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 for the Respondent(s) No. 1,1.1,1.2,1.3,1.4,1.5,1.6,1.7,1.8,2 ==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP N. BHATT
Date : 23/03/2023
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned senior advocate Mr.Shalin Mehta with learned advocate Ms.Krupali Bhatt for the petitioner.
-
Learned senior advocate Mr.Mehta has drawn attention of this Court to the suit filed by one Rajabhai Bhojabhai Mer which is based on one unregistered agreement to sale. It is submitted that during the pendency of the said suit, said Rajabhai Bhojabhai Mer claimed that he has purchased the land from the erstwhile owner by way of agreement to sale and he has executed Will in favour of the present petitioner. He has also drawn attention of this Court towards the release deed executed amongst the heirs of Devchand Nathu. He has further drawn attention towards the application which is filed under the provisions of Order XXII Rule 3 of the Civil Procedure Code by the present petitioner as the original plaintiff has expired during the pendency of the proceedings i.e. on 23.9.2020. He submitted further that the learned trial Court passed the impugned order dated 13.2.2023 without considering that whether the present petitioner is the legal representative or not as required under the provisions of Order XXII Rule 5 of CPC and has proceeded on the basis that the petitioner has not joined the heirs of the deceased plaintiff and therefore he has submitted that the trial Court has committed gross error in not following proper procedure.
-
Considering the submissions and considering the fact that though it is necessary for the trial Court to decide the claim of the petitioner by following procedure prescribed under Order XXII Rule 5 for impleading him as party, which was apparently not followed in the present case, issue notice returnable on 13.4.2023. Direct service is permitted, in addition to normal mode of service.