High Court of Gujarat

PARULBA WIFE OF INDRAJITSINH VAJUBHA VAGHELA D/O NAVALSINGH UDESINGH ZALAversusNITABA W/O JORAVARSINH ZALA D/O VAJUBHA RATANSANG VAGHELA

Disposal: 27-WITHDRAWN @ ADM.STAGE
Bench: MAULIK SHELAT

Holding

The Court granted the petitioners permission to refrain from pressing the petition and to challenge any consent decree later, without examining the merits.

Summary

The petitioners filed a Special Civil Application under Article 227 of the Constitution seeking to quash a final order dated 16/07/2026, to be impleaded as parties in a family partition suit, and to stay further proceedings. The petitioners, through counsel, indicated they would not press the petition further and sought liberty to challenge any consent decree later. The Court granted the permission, allowing the petitioners to raise objections to a consent decree in the trial court when the occasion arises, without examining the merits of the underlying dispute. It clarified that the rights and contentions of the parties remain open for future challenge. Consequently, the petition was disposed of as not pressed.

Issues considered

Whether the petitioners can be impleaded as necessary parties in the family partition suit.
Whether the order dated 16/07/2026 passed by the Additional Civil Judge can be quashed.
Whether a stay of the suit's proceedings is warranted pending resolution of the petition.
Whether the High Court can entertain the petition under Article 227 of the Constitution.

Legislation cited

Constitution of Indias. Article 227

Subjects

Article 227jurisdictionimpleadmentstay of proceedingsfamily partition disputeconsent decreespecial civil application

Judgment

     C/SCA/10282/2026                               ORDER DATED: 30/07/2026




     IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

      R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10282 of 2026

=============================================
    PARULBA WIFE OF INDRAJITSINH VAJUBHA VAGHELA D/O
            NAVALSINGH UDESINGH ZALA & ANR.
                         Versus
   NITABA W/O JORAVARSINH ZALA D/O VAJUBHA RATANSANG
                     VAGHELA & ORS.
=============================================
Appearance:
MR. MAULIK M SONI(7249) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2
=============================================
 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT
                           Date : 30/07/2026
                            ORAL ORDER

1.     Heard        Mr.Maulik   Soni,     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 Special Civil Application;

        B. YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to issue an
        appropriate writ, order, or direction to quash and set
        aside the impugned final order dated 16/07/2026
        passed by the learned 2nd Additional Civil Judge,
        Sanand, Ahmedabad (Rural) below Exhibit-8 in
        Regular Civil Suit No. 415 of2025 (at Annexure-A), and
        consequently allow the application Exhibit-8 (at
        Annexure-D), directing the impleadment of the
        Petitioners as party defendants in the said suit;

        C. YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to hold and
        declare that the Petitioners are necessary and proper
        parties to Regular Civil Suit No. 415 of 2025 for a
        complete, effective, and. just adjudication of the
        family partition dispute;

        D. YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to stay the


                                 Page 1 of 2
        C/SCA/10282/2026                                                                ORDER DATED: 30/07/2026




             operation, execution, implementation, and further
             proceedings of Regular Civil Suit No. 415 of 2025
             pending before the learned Additional Civil Judge,
             Sanand, including any orders or decrees to be passed
             below     the  Exhibit-18  compromise     application
             (Annexure-F and H), till the final disposal of this
             petition;”

3.         After arguing for some time, Mr.Soni, learned advocate
for the petitioners, under the instructions of his clients, does
not press this petition with a liberty to challenge the consent
decree, if any, that will be passed by the Trial Court in the
suit.

4.         The permission as sought for is granted.

5.         It is open for the petitioners to challenge the consent
decree before the Court concerned, in accordance with law.
As and when such occasion arises before the Court concerned
at the instance of the petitioners, after giving an opportunity
of hearing to all parties concerned, the Court shall decide
such objections of the petitioners, in accordance with law.

6.         It is made clear that this Court has neither gone into nor
examined the merits of the matter, thereby the rights and
contentions of the respective parties are hereby kept open.

7.         With the aforesaid observations and directions, the
present petition is disposed of, as not pressed.


                                                                               (MAULIK J. SHELAT, J)
GAURAV J THAKER
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: GAURAVKUMAR JANARDANBHAI THAKER(HC00951), Principal Pvt. Secretary, at High Court of Gujarat on 30/07/2026 17:48:15




                                                         Page 2 of 2

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Try "Article 227"Sign in to search