Patel v Wati [2005] FJHC 681; HBC0176, 179, 180, 182 & 184.2004L (18 January 2005)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI
AT LAUTOKA
CIVIL JURISDICTION

CIVIL ACTION NO. HBC0176.2004L,
HBC0179.2004L, HBC0180.2004L,
HBC0182.2004 & HBC0184.2004L

BETWEEN:

ATUL KUMAR AMBALAL PATEL
s/o Ambalal Dahyabhai Patel of 70 Stormont Road, London S.W.11, England, as Executor and Trustee of the Estate of Ambalal Dahyabhai Patel, late of Nadi, Fiji, Barrister and Solicitor,
NANDLAL and HARSUKHLAL
both sons of Khushal Bhai as executors and trustees of the estate of KHUSHAL TRIBHOVAN deceased and
PRAKASH MANJI
son of MANJI JADAVJI as the sole surviving executor and trustee of the estate of MANJI JADAVJI deceased
all of Nadi, Fiji
Plaintiffs

AND:

SUBHA WATI, JASWANT SINGH and AJIT SINGH & OTHERS
Defendants

Counsel for the Plaintiff: Ms. V. Patel
Counsel for the Defendants: Dr. Sahu Khan

Date of Hearing & Judgment: 18 January 2005

EXTEMPORE JUDGMENT

These are applications under Section 169 of the Land Transfer Act for vacant possession of agricultural land.

The defendants to these proceedings are the occupants of land that is contiguous with land, the subject of proceedings HBC0134, HBC0135 and HBC0136 of 2004 dealt with by this court and the subject of a judgment by Mr. Justice Singh on the 12^th August 2004. There were a total of 27 separate occupants. Most of whom have vacated their parcels of land without issue.

Both counsel have filed written submissions with the court upon which they rely.

Both counsel have informed me today that the facts and circumstances of the matters before the court are indeed the same as the facts and circumstances of the matters to which I have referred that were previously dealt with by Mr. Justice Singh.

I have had the opportunity of reading His Lordship’s judgment and I agree with his reasons and the orders that he made.

In the circumstances therefore, it seems appropriate that I make orders in terms similar to those made by His Lordship in the other matters and in doing so, I rely on and adopt His Lordship’s reasons. Accordingly in each of the matters, I make an order in terms of the summons filed that the defendant give possession within 28 days and in each of the matters, I order the defendant to pay the plaintiffs’ costs of Four Hundred Dollars ($400.00) again within 28 days.

JOHN CONNORS
JUDGE

At Lautoka
18 January 2005