IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 8285 of 1999 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE M.C.PATEL Sd/- ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO to see the judgements? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? : NO 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : NO of the judgement? 4. Whether this case involves a substantial question : NO of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder? 5. Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? : NO -------------------------------------------------------------- USHAKANT SAKERCHAND JHAVERI Versus LAXMI TRADERS -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR KK TRIVEDI for Petitioners MR BA SURTI for Respondent No. 1 RULE SERVED BY DS for Respondent No. 2 MR LR POOJARI, AGP. for Respondent No. 3,4, 7 NOTICE SERVED BY DS for Respondent No. 5 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE M.C.PATEL Date of decision: 30/03/2000 ORAL JUDGEMENT #. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against the mutation entry no.1168 dated 23.3.1999 certified on 4.5.1999 in village form no.6 of Village Piplod, Sub-district Choyrasi, District Surat. The said entry was made on the application of respondent nos. 1 and 2 for recording the order made on 31.3.1995 by this Court in Appeal From Order No.370 of 1991. The petitioners grievance is that the entry is not correctly made is not in consonance with the order made by this Court. Shri B.A.Surti, learned Counsel for the respondent no.1 states that he has no objection if the order dated 21.10.1991 made by this Court in Civil Application No. 2590 of 1991 in Appeal From Order No.370 of 1991 and the order dated 31.3.1995 made in Appeal From Order No.370 of 1991 is reproduced verbatim in the entry. Accordingly, the Talati, Piplod, District Surat, respondent no.5 herein, is directed to make a fresh entry reproducing verbatim the order made by this Court in Civil Application No. 2590 of 1991 in Appeal From Order No. 370 of 1991 and the order made in the said Appeal From Order. The petitioner shall withdraw the appeal filed by him before the Deputy Collector against the said entry. Rule made absolute accordingly with no order as to costs. The learned Counsel for the petitioner states that certain allegations which have been made in the petition against the Talati are not pressed. Direct service permitted. --- m.m.bhatt