C/SCA/11995/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/09/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11995 of 2025 ========================================================== DHIRUBHAI KHALAPBHAI AHIR & ORS. Versus YOGESH AMBELAL NAYAK & ORS. ========================================================== Appearance: MR NIRAV C SANGHAVI(5950) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MAULIK J.SHELAT Date : 09/09/2025 ORAL ORDER 1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Nirav C. Sanghavi for the petitioners. 2. At the outset, learned advocate Mr. Sanghavi would state that so far as the document which was in form of sale agreement executed between the predecessor of defendant Nos. 3 to 5 with the plaintiff on 02.06.1977 is concerned, amendment of pleadings sought for it and so also that document sought to be relied upon by the defendants Nos. 3 to 5 of the year 1966 in support of their counter claim is also questioned by way of such amendment. Apart from such, learned advocate would submit that the suit property known as ‘Ambalal na Vado” requires to be incorporated, thus, amendment sought for. Page 1 of 3 C/SCA/11995/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/09/2025 2.1 Learned advocate Mr. Sanghavi would submit that All such amendments aforesaid rejected by trial Court, which partially allowed impugned amendment application. 2.2 After arguing for some time, learned advocate Mr. Sangavhi, under the instruction of his client, instead of inviting any reasons on merit of the issue germen in the matter, he would only request this Court that the petitioners being plaintiffs of Special Civil Suit No. 13 of 2014 pending before the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Valsad may be permitted to rely upon such agreement of sale dated 02.06.1977 and cash receipt for execution of such sale agreement having already submitted along with the list of documents during the course of oral evidence of plaintiff to prove their case vis-à-vis adverse possession. 3. As such after going through the impugned order, this Court would also not like to interfere with the order passed by the trial Court while exercising its power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 4. This Court would only observe that it is specific case of the plaintiffs in their plaint more particularly Para-2 of the plaint that they are having possession of suit property since last more than 35 years and perfected their title by way of C/SCA/11995/2025 ORDER DATED: 09/09/2025 adverse possession to its original owners. The oral evidence can be led on the basis of the pleading of plaintiffs. It goes without saying that to prove such defence/fact stated in oral evidence, the plaintiffs as the case may be defendant, can place reliance upon the documentary evidence. So, plaintiff can place reliance upon the document of sale agreement alleged to have been executed with the predecessor of defendant Nos. 3 to 5 on 02.06.1977 and so also alleged cash receipt dated 02.06.1977 in this regards, as it appears that both these documents have already been submitted with the list of documents filed below Exh. 45 on 19.07.2017 before the trial Court in the aforesaid suit. Nonetheless, the documents sought to be relied upon must be admissible and proved in accordance with law. 5. In view of the aforesaid, learned advocate Mr. Sanghavi would not invite anymore and further reasons from this Court, and as such, this Court would not like to delve much into the matter anymore. 6. Accordingly, the present writ application is disposed of. Direct service is permitted. (MAULIK J.SHELAT,J) SALIM/ Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: MOHAMMAD SALIM(HC01108), STENO GR II, at High Court of Gujarat on 10/09/2025 14:37:00