SONAJI KHENGARJI MALI vs KASTURJI KANAJI MALI
- Court
- Gujarat High Court
C/SCA/15591/2016 (GJHC240490592016) JUDGMENT DATED: 01/09/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15591 of 2016
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15592 of 2016
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI
================================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✓
================================================================
SONAJI KHENGARJI MALI & ORS.
Versus
KASTURJI KANAJI MALI & ORS.
================================================================
Appearance:
MR ADIL R MIRZA(2488) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8
MR NIKUNJ KANARA, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3,4,5
MR TATTVAM K PATEL(5455) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI
Date : 01/09/2026
COMMON JUDGMENT
1. The present petitions are filed under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India, 1950 by the petitioners seeking
following prayers.
Prayers in Special Civil Application No.15591 of 2016:-
“(A) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to admit and allow this petition;
(B) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order or direction,
quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 20.7.2016 passed by Ld.
Special Secretary in MVV/HKP/BNS/18/2011, interest of justice; in the
(C) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to stay the implementation, operation and
execution of impugned order dated 20.7.2016 passed by Ld. Special Secretary in
MVV/HKP/BNS/18/2011, pending the admission, hearing and final disposal of
this petition, in the interest of justice;
Page 1 of 8
Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Mon Sep 07 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Sep 07 12:37:56 IST 2026
C/SCA/15591/2016 (GJHC240490592016) JUDGMENT DATED: 01/09/2026
(D) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to grant such other and further
reliefs as may be deemed fit and proper, in the interest of justice and equity ;”
Prayers in Special Civil Application No.15591 of 2016:-
“(A) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to admit and allow this petition;
(B) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order or direction,
quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 20.7.2016 passed by Ld.
Special Secretary in MVV/HKP/BNS/7/2011, interest of justice; in the
(C) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to stay the implementation, operation and
execution of impugned order dated 20.7.2016 passed by Ld. Special Secretary in
MVV/HKP/BNS/7/2011, pending the admission, hearing and final disposal of
this petition, in the interest of justice;
(D) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to grant such other and further
reliefs as may be deemed fit and proper, in the interest of justice and equity ;”
2. Heard learned Senior Advocate Mr. R.R. Marshall
assisted by learned advocate Mr. Adil R. Mirza for the
petitioners and learned AGP Mr. Nikunj Kanara for
respondent Nos.2 to 5 and learned advocate Mr. Tattvam K.
Patel for the respondent No.1 on hybrid mode.
3. Rule. Learned AGP and learned advocate for respondent
No.1 waives service of notice of Rule for the respective
respondents.
4. Since the facts and issues are identical in both the
Page 2 of 8
Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Mon Sep 07 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Sep 07 12:37:56 IST 2026
C/SCA/15591/2016 (GJHC240490592016) JUDGMENT DATED: 01/09/2026
petitions, upon requests of learned advocates for both the
parties, both the petitions are decided by this common order.
5. The brief facts of the case are as under:-
5.1. Petitioners have challenged the entry of partition being
mutation entry No.2588 before learned Mamlatdar, Deesa by
way of RTS Application No.41 of 2010. Learned Mamlatdar,
Deesa on 15.06.2010 rejected application and confirmed entry
No.2588. The petitioners assailed the order of confirming
mutation entry No.2588 before learned Deputy Collector,
Deesa by way of RTS Appeal No.83 of 2010. Learned Deputy
Collector vide order dated 18.12.2010 set aside the order of
learned Mamlatdar. On challenge, learned Collector,
Banaskantha vide order dated 06.11.2012 affirmed the order
of learned Deputy Collector, Deesa. The order of the learned
Collector was assailed by way of revision before the learned
SSRD, who rejected the revision vide order dated 20.07.2016.
Respondent No.1 herein, challenged the cancellation of entry
Page 3 of 8
Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Mon Sep 07 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Sep 07 12:37:56 IST 2026
C/SCA/15591/2016 (GJHC240490592016) JUDGMENT DATED: 01/09/2026
No.2700 posted giving effect of sale deed in favour of
respondent No.1. The entry of No.2700 was initially
challenged by petitioners before learned Deputy Collector,
Deesa. The order of learned Deputy Collector, Deesa was
affirmed by learned Collector, Banaskantha. Respondent No.1
being aggrieved by the order of learned Collector, filed
revision application No.MVV/HKP/BNS/18/2011. By
common order dated 20.07.2016, learned SSRD allowed the
revision of respondent No.1. Learned SSRD by order dated
20.07.2016 held that the decisions of civil Suits shall be
binding to parties.
6. Learned Senior advocate for petitioners submitted that
Regular Civil Suit No.56 of 2011 filed by the Rameshkumar
Kastruji Mali and Regular Civil Suit No.14 of 2017 filed by
the Kasturji Kanaji Tank before learned Additional Senior
Civil Judge, Deesa have been decided against present
petitioners on 28.03.2025 and on 30.04.2024 respectively. It is
Page 4 of 8
Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Mon Sep 07 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Sep 07 12:37:56 IST 2026
C/SCA/15591/2016 (GJHC240490592016) JUDGMENT DATED: 01/09/2026
therefore, submitted that the present petitions be disposed of in
view of the judgment and decree passed by the Competent
Civil Court with regard to the question of partition, possession
and cancellation of sale deed. Except above, no other
submissions are canvassed by learned Senior Advocate for the
petitioners.
7. Per contra , the advocate for the respondent No.1
submitted that respondent No.1 had filed Regular Civil Suit
No.56 of 2011 against the present petitioners for a relief of
cancellation of sale deed and permanent injunction coupled
with declaration which came to be decreed on 28.03.2025 in
favour of respondent No.1. Petitioner No.8 filed Regular Civil
Suit No.14 of 2017 under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act
for restoration of possession. The said suit came to be
dismissed on 30.04.2024. The order of learned SSRD holds
that decision of Civil Suits shall be binding to parties. Upon
instructions, it is submitted that judgment and decree passed in
Page 5 of 8
Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Mon Sep 07 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Sep 07 12:37:56 IST 2026
C/SCA/15591/2016 (GJHC240490592016) JUDGMENT DATED: 01/09/2026
both the civil suits have attained finality. Therefore, the
present petitions be dismissed. Except above, no other
submissions are canvassed by learned advocate for the
respondent No.1.
8. I have considered the submissions canvassed by the
learned advocates for the parties. It appears that the challenge
is made by the petitioners against the mutation entry No.2588
and petitioners of Special Civil Application No.15592 of 2016
have made the challenge against the mutation entry No.2700
with regard to execution of sale deed. Learned Mamlatdar has
rejected the application and confirmed mutation entry
No.2588. Respondent No.1 failed before learned Deputy
Collector and learned Collector. However, learned SSRD vide
order 20.07.2016 cancelled orders dated 15.02.2011 and
15.11.2012 and further held that the decisions of Civil Suits
shall be binding to parties.
Page 6 of 8
Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Mon Sep 07 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Sep 07 12:37:56 IST 2026
C/SCA/15591/2016 (GJHC240490592016) JUDGMENT DATED: 01/09/2026
9. It appears from the record that Regular Civil Suit No.14
of 2017 filed by the petitioner No.8-Rameshkumar Kasturji
Mali praying for a relief of restoration of possession, has been
dismissed on 30.04.2024 and Regular Civil Suit No.56 of
2011 filed by respondent No.1 praying for cancellation of sale
deed by petitioner Nos.3 to 5 and for a relief of permanent
injunction and declaration came to be decreed on 28.03.2025.
The sale deed dated 20.05.2011 executed in favour of
petitioner No.8 came to be cancelled and petitioner No.8 held
to be not acquiring any right, title or interest pursuant to
aforesaid sale deed. A specific query was raised by this Court
to learned Senior Advocate for the petitioners regarding any
challenge being made petitioners against the aforesaid two
judgments and decrees, learned Senior Advocate could not lay
his hand regarding any challenge being made by petitioners by
way of First Appeals. Therefore, in absence of any material
placed on record regarding any challenge being made against
Page 7 of 8
Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Mon Sep 07 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Sep 07 12:37:56 IST 2026
C/SCA/15591/2016 (GJHC240490592016) JUDGMENT DATED: 01/09/2026
the judgments and decrees, the question of title, possession
has been put to a rest and has attained its finality. Resultantly,
present petitions have become infructuous and are disposed of
accordingly. Rule stands discharged. However, if any, First
Appeals are filed by petitioners against the aforesaid
judgments and decrees, any decision rendered in First Appeals
shall be binding to both the parties, subject to further
challenge.
D. M. DESAI,J)
RINKU MALI
Page 8 of 8
Uploaded by RINKU MALI(HC01574) on Mon Sep 07 2026 Downloaded on : Mon Sep 07 12:37:56 IST 2026