REKHABEN CHATURBHAI PATEL Vs. KARANJI BHAVANJI VAGHELA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants gin are the original defendants against whom the respondents herein have filed suit being Special Civil Suit No.8 of 2006. The aforesaid suit was filed by the mother of the present respondents, Amthuba Bhavanji through her Power of Attorney Holder but she having died during the pendency of the suit her heirs i.e., present respondents herein were brought on record. In the aforesaid suit the plaintiff has prayed that the plaintiff has got one -fourths share in the amount of Rs.39,64,696/ -, which was deposited by the Government towards the compensation of the land that was acquired by the Government under the Land Acquisition Act. The plaintiff has also prayed for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from withdrawing the aforesaid amount. As per the case of the said plaintiff, the disputed land originally belonged to one Becharji Mulji. Said Becharji Mulji had four sons and the plaintiff is the daughter of one of the sons of Becharji Mulji, namely, Dungarji Becharji and that is how she has got one -fourths share in the suit land being daughter of deceased Dungarji Becharji and that is how she has claimed one -fourths share in the compensation amount in connection with the land which is acquired by the Government under Land Acquisition Act. The said suit is resisted by the defendants on various grounds. It is the case of the defendants that the plaintiff has got no right, title or interest in the said property. That the said suit is filed only for the purpose of blackmailing the defendants as the plaintiff has never objected to the same when the award was declared or even when the reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act was made. It is also the case of the defendants that the plaintiff had never objected before the Collector at any point of time. On this and such other grounds the suit is resisted by defendants Nos.1 to 7. The original defendants Nos.8 to 12 have also resisted the said suit. It is the say of the said defendants that they are bona fide purchasers of the land before the land was subjected to land acquisition proceedings and that the plaintiff has no case worth the name for any interim relief.

(2.) THE learned trial Judge after hearing both the sides granted interim injunction restraiing the defendants from withdrawing one -fourths amount of the compensation. So far as three -fourths amount is concerned, the defendants were permitted to withdraw the said amount deposited as per the order passed in Land Reference Case No.338 of 1998. The learned trial Judge also directed that the said amount may be deposited in the Civil Court and thereafter the same may be deposited in a nationalised bank for a period of one year and to renew the same periodically in case the suit is not decided. It is the aforesaid order which is impugned at the instance of the original defendants.

(3.) MS Trusha K Patel, learned advocate for the appellant submitted that the plaintiff has no right, title or interest over the amount in question as the property was subjected to partition many many years ago and at that time the plaintiff's father did not object to the same. He also did not object to the revenue entry or proceedings when the name of ancestors of the defendants Nos.1 to 7 was entered into revenue record. It is submitted by her that deceased Dungarji i.e., the plaintiff's father has got his own properties which is in his occupation and therefore the plaintiff has no right, title or interest in the amount in question as the land belongs to ancestors of defendants Nos.1 to 7 and the same was acquired by the Government and the compensation amount is deposited in the Court. Ms Patel further submitted that for all these years the plaintiff's father had never objected to nor the plaintiff had made any grievance before the Collector at the time when the amount was deposited under the Land Acquisition Act nor any proceedings were taken up as contemplated under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act nor any grievance was made at the time when the reference was made at the instance of the defendants under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act.