TAKHUBHA DAJIRAJ JADEJA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Order dtd. 26/10/2018 passed in Special Civil Application No.18492 of 2014 is challenged in this intra court appeal.

(2.) We have heard arguments of Mr.P.P.Majmudar, learned counsel appearing for the appellants, Ms.Shah, learned Government advocate appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and Mr.Jigar Raval, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3. Perused the record.

(3.) Being conscious of the fact that in intra court appeals, interference being limited, we have examined the facts on hand. Appellants under three sale deeds executed on 24/5/2007 by Mayank Patel through his power of attorney holder Navinbhai purchased half share including right, title and interest of undivided half share in Survey Nos.463/1, 464/2, 461/1, 471/2 and 468 of village Sherkhi, Taluka District Vadodara (hereinafter referred as the "subject property"). On purchase of said property, they sought for revenue entries being mutated in their names. Accordingly, revenue entries came to be mutated on 31/5/2007 being entry Nos.8729 and 8730. However, on account of objections having been lodged, it was treated as disputed case by the jurisdictional Mamlatdar. On 4/4/2008, he cancelled entries. This was challenged by the appellants before the Deputy Collector in an appeal which came to be allowed on 31/1/2010 and remanded the matter back to the Mamlatdar. On such remand being made, the Mamlatdar upheld the entries on 9/6/2010. This order was upheld by the Deputy Collector on 31/1/2013. Being aggrieved by the same, revision application was filed by the third respondent before the Collector which was allowed on 16/5/2014. Challenging the correctness of the said order, revision application was filed before the SSRD by the appellants herein which came to be dismissed on 21/10/2014. Being aggrieved by the said order, they approached the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.18492 of 2014 which has been dismissed by order dtd. 26/10/2018 and the order of the SSRD came to be upheld. Hence, this appeal.