BHARATSINH GOMANSINH SOLANKI Vs. NAGAR PRAMUKH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BEING aggrieved by the concurrent order of vacating the interim relief in an application below Ex. -5, the petitioner has preferred the present petition. The petitioners are original plaintiffs in Civil Suit No. 64 of 2005. The said Civil Suit was instituted before Civil Judge, Junior Division, Mangrol, District Surat. The dispute appears to have arisen with the respondents herein, who are the defendants in the said Civil Suit. The defendants were to make road on the southern side of the plaintiffs' land. The suit land is at Village Tarsadi. It is a part of Survey No. 275. It is say of the plaintiff that father of the present plaintiff had purchased the suit land by executing the registered sale deed. It is also say of the plaintiffs that the suit land consists of 16,644 sq. mtr. Measurement of the suit land and details of surrounding boundaries is stated by the plaintiffs in his application (Ex. 5).

(2.) IT is further say of the plaintiffs that before the City Survey Officer, the proceedings had proceeded without giving plaintiffs sufficient opportunity to make the representation.

(3.) LEARNED advocate Ms. Kruti M Shah draws the attention of the Court that before the learned trial court the respondents have neither filed written submissions nor has filed any reply. The learned trial Court records that since the respondents have not filed any written submissions, their right to file written submissions is closed. The plaintiffs have produced the relevant documentary evidence before the learned trial court. However, the court had refused to grant interim relief on the ground that plaintiff has made suppression of facts and has not come forward with clean hands. This finding came to be recorded by the trial court on the basis of assertions made by the respondents in Caveat Application.