BHANUBEN MAVABHAI BHUVA W/O DAYALAL DEVSHIBHAI VAGHADIYA vs YUSUFBHAI HASANBAI SINDHI

C/SCA/16836/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/11/2026
(GJHC240840392026)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16836 of 2026

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT

==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
BHANUBEN MAVABHAI BHUVA W/O DAYALAL DEVSHIBHAI VAGHADIYA
& ORS.
Versus
YUSUFBHAI HASANBAI SINDHI & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. ZALAK B PIPALIA(6161) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT

Date : 05/11/2026

JUDGMENT
1. Heard Mr. Zalak B. Pipalia, learned advocate for the
petitioners.
2. This petition is filed under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India, seeking the following reliefs:
“(A) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to admit and allow
this petition;
(B) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to issue a Writ of
Certiorari and/or Writ in nature of Certiorari or any other
appropriate Writ Order or Direction, for quashing and setting
aside of the impugned order dated 08/10/2026 passed below
Ex. 99 in Regular Civil Suit no. 38 of 2023 by the Ld. Principal
Sr. Civil Judge, Keshod at Annexure - A to the petition in the
Page 1 of 4
Uploaded by SYED SHAHANAZ(HC02353) on Fri Nov 06 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Nov 06 16:01:39 IST 2026

C/SCA/16836/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/11/2026
(GJHC240840392026)
interest of justice;
(C) Pending the admission, hearing, and final disposal of this
petition, YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to stay the
execution, implementation, and operation of the impugned
order dated 08/10/2026 passed below Ex. 99 by Ld. Principal
Sr. Civil Judge, Keshod in Regular Civil Suit no. 38 of 2023 at
Annexure - A to the petition in the interest of justice;”
3. At the outset, Mr. Pipalia, learned advocate, would
state that after passing of the impugned order by the
Trial Court, the petitioners – defendants has submitted
necessary affidavit as was required to be submitted by
the defendants as per the earlier order passed by the
Trial Court in the matter.
3.1. Mr. Pipalia, learned advocate, would submit that the
reason of appointment of Court Commissioner is due to
non-filing of affidavit by the petitioners and observing
such conduct, the Court Commissioner was appointed by
the Trial Court below Exhibit-99 in the matter.
3.2. Mr. Pipalia, learned advocate, would further submit
that if the observation made by the Trial Court in its
impugned order is allowed to continue, it would surely
come in the way of the petitioners, who is facing an
Page 2 of 4
Uploaded by SYED SHAHANAZ(HC02353) on Fri Nov 06 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Nov 06 16:01:39 IST 2026

C/SCA/16836/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/11/2026
(GJHC240840392026)
application under Order XXXIX Rule 2A of CPC filed by
the respondents – plaintiffs.
3.3. Making the above submissions, Mr. Pipalia, learned
advocate for the petitioners, would request this Court to
entertain this petition.
4. No other and further submissions have been
advanced by learned advocate for the petitioners.
5. Having heard Mr. Pipalia, learned advocate for the
petitioners, prima facie , it appears that the Trial Court
has appointed the Court Commissioner to ascertain the
actual position of the disputed site in question, as the
respondents herein – plaintiffs alleged the breach of order
status quo by the petitioners filed an application under
Order XXXIX Rule 2A of CPC.
6. So far as the appointment of Court Commissioner by
the Trial Court by exercising its discretion to ascertain
the prevailing situation and to bring the truth on record is
concerned, no fault can be found with the order. At the
same time, the apprehension on the part of the
Page 3 of 4
Uploaded by SYED SHAHANAZ(HC02353) on Fri Nov 06 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Nov 06 16:01:39 IST 2026

C/SCA/16836/2026 JUDGMENT DATED: 05/11/2026
(GJHC240840392026)
petitioners can be taken care of, inasmuch as the Trial
Court is required to adjudicate the application filed under
Order XXXIX Rule 2A on its own merit and while doing so,
it should not be influenced by any of its observations
made in the order impugned in the petition passed below
Exhibit-99 in the suit.
7. Since the petitioners have already submitted their
affidavit as was directed by the Trial Court in past, the
Trial Court is hereby directed to take note of such
affidavit while adjudicating the application filed under
Order XXXIX Rule 2A of CPC.
8. Without further delving into the matter, according to
me, the impugned order is not required to be disturbed
by this Court except what has been observed herein
above.
9. In view of the above, this petition is not entertained.
Accordingly, it is dismissed. No order as to costs.
(MAULIK J.SHELAT,J)
SHAHANAZ
Page 4 of 4
Uploaded by SYED SHAHANAZ(HC02353) on Fri Nov 06 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Nov 06 16:01:39 IST 2026