AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Rajesh H. Shukla, J.—Rule.
The present Revision Application has been filed u/s 2 of the Mamlatdar Court Act and u/s 115 of the CPC for challenging the order dated 27.12.2004 passed by the Deputy Collector in Revision Case No. 1 of 2004, by which, the Deputy Collector allowed the said Revision Application filed by the applicants herein by quashing and setting aside the order dated 13.02.2004 passed by the Mamlatdar in Mamlatdar Court Act Case No. 2 of 2003.
The applicants and the Respondents are the close relatives and, therefore, the dispute is with regard to only right of way. The submission is made by the learned Counsel, Mr. Vaishnav with regard to Revision Application having been decided without providing any opportunity of hearing, which is also disputed by the learned Counsel, Mr. D.V. Bhavsar for Mr. V.C. Vaghela stating that the applicants did not remain present. However, considering the aforesaid facts and also the fact that at the time when the decisions was taken, the applicants were not represented, the interest of justice would be served if the matter is remanded back to the Deputy Collector by setting aside the order passed by him in Revision Application for deciding afresh in accordance with law after hearing both the parties concerned.
Accordingly, the present Civil Revision Application stands allowed. The order dated 27.12.2004 passed by the Deputy Collector in Revision Case No. 1 of 2004 is hereby quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded back to the Deputy Collector, who shall decide Mamlatdar Court Act Revision Case No. 1/2004 afresh in accordance with law after hearing the parties concerned on the basis of the material and evidence on record without being influenced by this order in any manner. Rule is made absolute. Direct service is permitted.