RANJITSINH HIMATSINH GOHIL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Notice was already issued for final disposal and, therefore, the matter is finally heard today. The petitioner has preferred the petition for challenging the order passed by the Deputy Collector, its confirmation thereof by the Collector as well as by the State Government, whereby the entry based on the registered sale deed is cancelled.

(2.) Heard Mr. Buch for the petitioner. Mr. Mengde, learned A.G.P. for the State authorities and Mr. A.J. Patel for the contesting respondents nos. 4/1, 4/2 and 4/3. The said respondents are stated to have been served but they have chosen not to appear.

(3.) Upon hearing the learned advocates appearing for both the sides, it appears that there is no dispute on the point that the entry came to be mutated in the revenue record based on the registered sale deed in favour of the petitioner. However, the revenue authorities have proceeded on the basis that as the exact demarcation of the land of the family inter se amongst the co-sharer/co-owner was not identified, the entry could not have been mutated. There is also no dispute on the point that the petitioner has preferred Suit No. 49/2000 in the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division) Vadodara for protecting the possession of the land and the said suit is pending.