RANSURVIRSINH ANIRUDHSINHJI JADEJA ORS v. HARSHVARDHANSINH PRAHALADSINHJI JADEJA ORS
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
petition is disposed of as not pressed
Provisions considered
- Constitution of India art. 227
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 s. 96(1)
Key paragraphs
- Para 77. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the present petition is disposed of as not pressed. Lalji Desai (MAULIK J.SHELAT,J)
Judgment
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT Date : 27/07/2026 ORAL ORDER
#1. Heard Mr. H.P.Baxi, learned advocate with Ms. Shivani Modi, learned advocate for the petitioners.
#2. This petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following reliefs:- (A) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to issue appropriate Writ, order or direction, and to set aside and quashed the order passed by 13th Addl. Sessions Judge, Rajkot rejecting application filed by Appellants to grant permission Under Section 96(1) of C.P.C. to file Regular Civil Appeal against the ilelgal compromise decree obtained by Fraud in Reg. Civil Suit No.127 of 1997 dated 25/06/2007 passed by the 8th Add. Senior Civil Judge, Rajkot. ANNEXURE-A. (B) YOUR LORDSHIPS may further be pleased to issue appropriate Writ, order or direction to the Principal District Judge, Rajkot to register the Civil Regular Appeal filed by Appellants and to decide the Appeal on merits. (C) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to grant such other and further reliefs as deemed fit in the interest of justice.” C/SCA/2958/2026 ORDER DATED: 27/07/2026
#3. At the outset, it has been pointed by Mr. Baxi, learned advocate for the petitioners that in the impugned order passed by the Appellate Court, it has been specifically observed that the petitioners have remedy to approach the Trial Court who passed the consent decree and in view of the judgment of the full Bench of this Court in the case of Sakina Sultanali Sunesara (Momin) & Ors. Vs. Shia Imami Ismaili Momin Jamat Samaj & Ors. reported in 2020 (1) GLR 586, remedy available with the petitioners is to approach the Trial Court who passed the consent decree.
#4. Having taken note of the aforesaid facts and position of law, Mr. Baxi, learned advocate for the petitioners, under the instructions of his clients, does not press this petition at this stage with a liberty to approach the Trial Court, who passed the consent decree.
#5. The permission, as prayed for, is granted. It is open for the petitioners to file an appropriate application before the Trial Court concerned who passed the consent decree.
#6. Once such application will be filed, after giving an opportunity of hearing to parties concerned, the Trial Court shall decide such application in accordance with law, without being influenced by any of the observations made either by this Court or by the Appellate Court in its impugned order.
#7. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the present petition is disposed of as not pressed. Lalji Desai (MAULIK J.SHELAT,J)
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: petition is disposed of as not pressed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India — art. 227; Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 96(1).
Which court decided this case, and when?
Gujarat High Court, on 27 Jul 2026. The bench was MAULIK SHELAT.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.