HEMDEEP AMBALAL PATEL Vs. ANILBHAI BHOLABHAI PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Second Appeal, has been filed challenging the judgment and order dtd. 30/3/2019 passed by the learned 6 th Additional District Judge, Vadodara whereby, the appeal filed by the appellants - original plaintiffs, came to be partly allowed and the judgment and decree dtd. 18/6/2018 passed by the learned 7 th Additional Senior Civil Judge, Vadodara, came to be confirmed.

(2.) The issue, revolves around survey no.37. It is the case of the appellants - original plaintiffs that the suit property (hereinafter referred the 'disputed land') was an ancestral property and was in the joint ownership of the original plaintiffs and original defendant nos.3 to 6 as it belonged to Gokalbhai Bhagwandas Patel, i.e. the grandfather of the original plaintiffs. According to the appellants, the disputed land was surreptitiously sold to original defendant nos.1 and 2 by executing a registered sale deed dtd. 31/7/2003. According to the appellants, at the time of the sale of the suit property, the appellant no.1 - original plaintiff no.1, was minor; whereas, the original plaintiff nos.2 to 5 were not aware about the said transaction, as the consent was not obtained despite the fact that the appellant nos.2 to 5 - original plaintiff nos.2 to 5 were major. With this background that a suit being Special Civil Suit no.629 of 2011 came to be filed, inter alia, challenging the sale deed dtd. 31/7/2003 with a further prayer of declaration, that the disputed land, is of undivided Hindu coparcenary property of the original plaintiffs - appellants.

(3.) The suit, came to be rejected vide order dtd. 18/6/2018 and the original plaintiffs were jointly and severally held liable to pay the cost of Rs.3,000.00 each under the provisions of Sec. 35A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Code'). Being aggrieved, the appellants - original plaintiffs had preferred the appeal before the appellate Court, which came to be partly allowed insofar as the cost is concerned; and on merits, the judgment and decree dtd. 18/6/2018, came to be confirmed. Hence, the present Second Appeal.