RAJENDRA @ RAJUBHAI GOVANBHAI PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FROM the records, it appears that the petitioner's father held certain land in his personal name and certain lands were jointly recorded in the names of the petitioner's father and uncle. The petitioner's father died somewhere in the year 1975, undisputedly, before 1st April, 1976, and the uncle also died on 12th September, 1977. The petitioner is said to have succeeded to 24 Acres and 5 Gunthas of land from his father amounting to 34 Acres and 1 Guntha in terms of dry crop area.

(2.) THE submission of Shri Mehta is that the approach of the authority was patently illegal because the original land held by the family would be taken to be the ancestral land and after the notional partition, each would be held to be possessing particular land and if any person or member of the family receives any additional land either in succession or under any other mode, then, that would be taken to be his personal land and addition of such land would not change the nature and character of the land, which otherwise was ancestral property.

(3.) THOUGH Shri Hukum Singh, learned Counsel for the respondent, vehemently opposed the contention, but, in view of judgement dated 21st February, 2007 passed in Special Civil Application No.14077 of 1994 [Thakorbhai Dahyabhai Naik vs. State of Gujarat], I must uphold the contention of Shri Mehta.