High Court of Gujarat

NAGINBHAI SHUKKARBHAI PATELversusSOMLABHAI RAGHIYABAHI PATEL SINCE DECD THROUGH HEIRS

Disposal: 53-ALLOWED / GRANTED @ ADM.STAGE
Bench: MAULIK SHELAT

Holding

The court held that the Second Appeal No. 99 of 2004 should be restored to its original file.

Summary

Naginbhai Shukkarbhai Patel filed a miscellaneous civil application seeking restoration of Second Appeal No. 99 of 2004. The applicant was represented by Mr. Shaivang D. Mehta, while the opponent was represented by Mr. Adil R. Mirza, who waived service of the rule. The court considered the applicant's request and the assurance that the matter would be taken up for hearing. After hearing the arguments, the court found that the application merited relief. Consequently, the court partially allowed the application, made the rule absolute to the extent sought, and ordered that the second appeal be restored to its original file.

Issues considered

Whether the Second Appeal No. 99 of 2004 can be restored to its original file upon the applicant's application.

Subjects

restoration of appealcivil procedurehigh court ordermiscellaneous civil application

Judgment

     C/MCA/1795/2026                            ORDER DATED: 29/07/2026




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

 R/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR RESTORATION) NO. 1795 of 2026

                       In R/SECOND APPEAL/99/2004

==========================================================
               NAGINBHAI SHUKKARBHAI PATEL
                          Versus
  SOMLABHAI RAGHIYABAHI PATEL SINCE DECD THROUGH HEIRS &
                           ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR SHAIVANG D MEHTA(5623) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR ADIL R MIRZA(2488) for the Opponent(s) No. 1.1,1.2
==========================================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT

                            Date : 29/07/2026

                              ORAL ORDER


1.    Heard Mr. Shaivang D. Mehta, learned advocate for

the applicant.



2.    Rule returnable forthwith. Mr. Adil R. Mirza, learned

advocate waives service of rule on behalf of the opponent.


3.    Mr. Mehta, learned advocate, would submit that one

opportunity may be given to the applicant and he

undertakes to conduct the matter as and when it is taken

up for hearing.




                                Page 1 of 2
         C/MCA/1795/2026                                                     ORDER DATED: 29/07/2026




  4.       Having heard learned advocate for the applicant and

  considering the averments made in the application as

  well as assurance given by learned advocate for the

  applicant, the present application deserves to be allowed.



  5.       Accordingly,                the       present            application              is     partly

  allowed in terms of paragraph 5 (B) of the application.

  Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Second

  Appeal No. 99 of 2004 is ordered to be restored back on

  its original file.


                                                                              (MAULIK J.SHELAT,J)
  SHAHANAZ

Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: SYED SHAHANAZ(HC02353), ENGLISH STENO GRADE-II\, at High Court of Gujarat on 29/07/2026 14:49:29




                                                   Page 2 of 2

Search Indian case law

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

Try "restoration of appeal"Sign in to search