Smt. Kusum Pundeer vs Ajay Singh Chauhan, Advocate And ...

Citation : 2012 Latest Caselaw 2567 ALL
Judgement Date : 2 July, 2012

Allahabad High Court
Smt. Kusum Pundeer vs Ajay Singh Chauhan, Advocate And ... on 2 July, 2012
Bench: Manoj Misra



HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 27
 

 
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 26131 of 2012
 

 
Petitioner :- Smt. Kusum Pundeer
 
Respondent :- Ajay Singh Chauhan, Advocate And Others
 
Petitioner Counsel :- Nipun Singh
 
Respondent Counsel :- Anoop Trivedi
 

 
Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J.

Sri Anoop Trivedi, Advocate has accepted notice on behalf of respondents No. 2 and 3.

Issue notice to respondents No.1  returnable  within four weeks.Steps may be taken within  three days.

List for admission  on 16.8.2012.

By which time, respondents shall file counter affidavit.

The contention  on behalf of the  petitioner is that an Original Suit No.734 of 1998 was instituted  for partition  with respect to certain  properties situated  at Muzaffarnagar as well as  at Ambala (State of Haryana), jointly  owned  by the parties.  It is contended  that a plea with regard  to jurisdiction  was raised  by the defendant which was  not accepted  and the civil court  at Baghpat, to whom  the matter was assigned upon transfer  by this Court, held that  it had jurisdiction  to decide  the case even with respect  to the properties at Ambala. It has been contended  that  subsequently, a  portion  of the property at Ambala was sold during the pendency  of the suit to defendant No.3, who was impleaded, as such, upon an application  by the plaintiff.  It is contended  that the defendant No.3 subsequently raised  an objection  with regard to jurisdiction  of the civil court by claiming that the suit with respect  to agricultural  property at Ambala could not be entertained  by a  civil court by virtue  of Section 158 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887.  The counsel for the  petitioner submits  that  the court below failed to take notice of  Clause (xvii) of Sub-section 1 of Section 158 of  the Punjab  Land  Revenue Act, 1887  while holding that  the civil court at Baghpat would not  be having  jurisdiction  to entertain  the suit with regard  to agricultural  property mentioned in scheduled-B of the plaint.The counsel for the  petitioner also placed reliance on section 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure.  

The matter requires consideration.

Till the next date of listing, further proceeding of Original  Suit No. 734 of 1998, pending  in the court of Civil  Judge (Senior Division) Baghpat,  shall remain stayed.

Order Date :- 2.7.2012 G.S