NAGINBHAI SHUKKARBHAI PATEL v. SOMLABHAI RAGHIYABAHI PATEL SINCE DECD THROUGH HEIRS ORS
Case at a glance
Key paragraphs
- Para 55. Accordingly, the present application is partly allowed in terms of paragraph 5 (B) of the application. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Second Appeal No. 99 of 2004 is ordered to be restored back on its original file. SHAHANAZ (MAULIK J.SHELAT,J)
Judgment
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT Date : 29/07/2026 ORAL ORDER
#1. Heard Mr. Shaivang D. Mehta, learned advocate for the applicant.
#2. Rule returnable forthwith. Mr. Adil R. Mirza, learned advocate waives service of rule on behalf of the opponent.
#3. Mr. Mehta, learned advocate, would submit that one opportunity may be given to the applicant and he undertakes to conduct the matter as and when it is taken up for hearing. C/MCA/1795/2026 ORDER DATED: 29/07/2026
#4. Having heard learned advocate for the applicant and considering the averments made in the application as well as assurance given by learned advocate for the applicant, the present application deserves to be allowed.
#5. Accordingly, the present application is partly allowed in terms of paragraph 5 (B) of the application. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Second Appeal No. 99 of 2004 is ordered to be restored back on its original file. SHAHANAZ (MAULIK J.SHELAT,J)
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.