LEGAL HEIR OF LATE KANTABEN RAMESHCHANDRA SHUKLA Vs. AUTHORIZED AGENT OR ADMINISTRATOR WITH RESPECT TO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE. Mr. Jigar G. Gadhavi, learned advocate waives service of rule for respondent No.1. By way of this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-

(2.) THE facts arising out of this petition are that the wife of the present petitioner ? late Kantaben Rameshchandra had purchased plot No.33-A situated at Village Nagalpur, District Mehsana in Bhairavkrupa Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the society') at a price of Rs.7,000/- from respondent No.2 by a registered sale deed dated 23.11.1985. It is the case of the petitioner that in the said registered sale deed it was clearly mentioned that the predecessor in title Shobhnaben had not taken any loan from the society concerned and there was also statement in the said sale deed that no right or encumbrance created upon the land in question being plot No.33-A. It is the case of the petitioner that on production of photocopy of the said sale deed, the petitioner was also inducted as member of the society. It is further the case of the petitioner that even at that stage, it was neither brought on record, nor mentioned that a loan was taken from Gujarat State Cooperative Housing Finance Ltd. upon the land in question. THE petitioner thereafter constructed a tenement from his own funds and that no loan was availed either from the society or from the Gujarat State Cooperative Housing Finance Ltd. It further transpires from the record that thereafter, Lavad Suit came to be filed before the Board of Nominees at Mehsana being Lavad Case No.388 of 1994. THE said suit came to be decreed against which an appeal being Appeal No.271 of 2002 came to be filed before the Gujarat State Cooperative Tribunal. THE judgment and award passed in the said Lavad Suit was confirmed by the Gujarat State Cooperative Tribunal and the appeal came to be dismissed. THE petitioner approached this Court by way of filing Special Civil Application No.665 of 2011 which was disposed of and the petitioner thereafter paid a sum of Rs.3,20,000/- as per the order passed by this Court.

(3.) THE record further transpires that being aggrieved by the said order of dismissal, the petitioner herein filed Restoration Application being Restoration Application No.30 of 2011 along with an application for condonation of delay being Misc. Application No.53 of 2011. THE said Misc. Application No.53 of 2011 for condonation of delay came to be dismissed vide order dated 5.8.2011. Being aggrieved by the said order dated 5.8.2011, the present petition is filed.