SCA/5911/1998 1/5 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 5911 of 1998 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================================= CHAMPABEN WD/O NARANBHAI CHHAGANBHAI PATEL & 3 - Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & 3 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR JITENDRA M PATEL for Petitioner(s) : 1 - 4. MS. MANISHA LAVKUMAR AGP for Respondent(s) : 1 - 2. MR KH BAXI for Respondent(s) : 3. MR CJ VIN for Respondent(s) : 4, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI Date : 23/10/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. Petitioners have challenged orders Annexures F, G and H passed by the Revenue Authorities with respect to lands bearing S.Nos.254, 104/2, 105 and 169 of village Vavol, Taluka and District SCA/5911/1998 2/5 JUDGMENT Gandhinagar. 2. Petitioner No.1 is a second wife of deceased Naranbhai Chhaganbhai Patel. Petitioner Nos.2 to 4 are his sons through the second marriage. Respondent Nos.3 and 4 are the sons of deceased Naranbhai through his first wife Jivaben who had pre-deceased Naranbhai. Apparently, on the premise of deceased Naranbhai during his life time had transferred his agricultural lands bearing S.Nos.254, 104/2, 105 and 169 to his second wife Champaben through a written gift dated 6.2.1980, entries in the revenue record came to be made accordingly in favour of Champaben. Naranbhai expired in the year 1990. His sons from first marriage, respondent Nos.3 and 4 herein, challenged said entries before Deputy Collector some time in the year 1992. The appeal was allowed by impugned order dated 1.10.1993. SCA/5911/1998 3/5 JUDGMENT Further revisions filed by the petitioners before Collector as well as Revenue Secretary came to be dismissed by impugned orders dated 13.1.1994 and 4.6.1997 respectively. 3. Having heard learned advocates appearing for the parties and having perused the material on record, it appears that the authorities found that lands bearing S.Nos.254 and 169 were not self-acquired properties of Naranbhai. Admittedly, S.No.254 was ancestral property. The property bearing S.No.169 is held to be land received by Naranbhai under Devasthan Inam Abolition Act. Apparently, therefore, land bearing S.Nos.254 and 169 could not have been transferred by Naranbhai during his life time to the exclusion of other members of the family. To that extent, the entires made in favour of petitioner No.1 herein in the year 1980 must be cancelled. SCA/5911/1998 4/5 JUDGMENT 4. With respect to other two survey Nos. i.e., S.Nos.104/2 and 105, since there is some prima facie material to suggest that deceased Naranbhai had desired that during his life time the said lands should go to his wife, interference with the finding of the authorities below was not justified, particularly considering that revenue entries are made primarily for fiscal purpose and any person seeking to assert his or her legal right can take recourse to civil proceedings. This is not to suggest that it is my finding that S.Nos.104/2 and 105 were self-acquired properties of Naranbhai. It will be upto the parties to agitate such issues before competent Court. 5. Learned advocate Shri J.M. Patel for the petitioners submitted that the appeal was preferred by respondent Nos.3 and 4 belatedly. However, I find that the entries were effected in the year 1980 when father of respondent Nos.3 and 3 was alive. Admittedly, no notice was served on them since, obviously, same was not required. SCA/5911/1998 5/5 JUDGMENT They, therefore, would not have information about such entries. Some time after death of their father if they take up the question any further in appeal, I do not find that the appeal could be disposed of as belated. 6. Under the circumstances, the petition is allowed in part. Orders under challenge with respect to lands bearing S.Nos.104/2 and 105 are set aside. Entries made in the year 1980 in favour of the petitioners shall be restored with respect to lands bearing S.Nos.254 and 169 and orders passed by the authorities below are upheld. 7. Petition is disposed of accordingly. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Interim relief stands vacated. (Akil Kureshi, J.) ... (karan)