SCA/6155/2008 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 6155 of 2008 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH ========================================================= 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 ? ========================================================= RAIBEN REVABHAI SOLANKI & 1 - Petitioner(s) Versus PATEL SOMABHAI SHANKARBHAI - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR TEJAS P SATTA for Petitioner(s) : 1, 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3, 1.2.4, 1.2.5,1.2.6 - 2. MR MAHENDRA K PATEL for Respondent(s) : 1, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH Date : 11/08/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. Rule. Mr. M.K. Patel, learned advocate appearing for the respondent waives service of rule on behalf SCA/6155/2008 2/3 JUDGMENT of the respondent. With the consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, matter is taken up for final hearing today. 2. By way of this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners original plaintiffs have prayed for an appropriate writ, direction and / or order quashing and setting aside the order passed by learned trial Court below Exh. 105 dated 12.3.2008 passed in Regular Civil Suit No. 16 of 1998 in not condoning the delay of 249 days in preferring the application for bringing the heirs or original plaintiffs No. 1. 3. The only reason given by the learned trial Court while rejecting the said application and in not condoning the delay in preferring the application for bringing heirs on record, is that the delay is occurred in preparing Pedhinama, which according to defendants, was not required. It appears that there is nothing on record to show that the intention of the petitioner was deliberately and mala fide, to file the application for bringing the heirs was SCA/6155/2008 3/3 JUDGMENT belatedly. In absence of the same, learned trial Court ought to have condoned the delay in preferring the application for bringing the heirs on record more particularly, when the original plaintiff No. 2 is already on record. 4. Considering the above and for the reasons stated above, petition succeeds and impugned order passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Vadanagar dated 12.3.2008 passed below Exh. 105 in Regular Civil Suit No. 16 of 1998 is hereby quashed and setting aside and the delay caused in preferring the application for bringing the heirs of original plaintiffs No. 1 is hereby condoned. Rule is made absolute. (M.R.SHAH, J) Kaushik