Rajesh vs Jyoti

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 5183 Raj
Judgement Date : 24 May, 2023

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Rajesh vs Jyoti on 24 May, 2023
Bench: Rekha Borana

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 290/2022

1. Rajesh S/o Ratan Lal, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Pratapgarh at present in front of Indore Dharamshala, do batti road, Ratlam, MP

2. Gita Bai W/o Rajesh, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Pratapgarh at present in front of Indore Dharamshala, do batti road, Ratlam, MP

----Appellants Versus

1. Jyoti W/o Pramod, Aged About 48 Years, R/o At Present Dahod, Gujarat.

2. Arjun Lal S/o Gendmal, Aged About 61 Years, R/o Mahal Darwaja, Pratapgarh.

3. Vidyasagar S/o Mangi Lal, aged about 55 years, R/o Pratapgarh.

                                                                  ----Respondents


For Appellant(s)           :     Mr. Rajesh Panwar, Sr. Advocate
                                 assisted by
                                 Mr. Chandra Mohan Sharma
For Respondent(s)          :     --


HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA Order 24/05/2023

1. The following substantial questions of law arise in the present appeal:

(i) Whether the first Appellate Court erred in reversing the findings on issue No.2 without considering the fact as to how the present appellants-defendants No.2 and 3 could have encroached on the plot of the plaintiffs when it was an admitted fact on record that there was one plot of Kanchan Bai existing between the two plots and ignoring the fact that Kanchan Bai was not impleaded in the present suit?
(ii) Whether the first Appellate Court erred in reversing the findings of the Trial Court on issue No.2 despite the (Downloaded on 25/05/2023 at 09:08:34 PM) (2 of 2) [CSA-290/2022] specific admissions of the plaintiffs themselves that no action of encroachment was attributable to the present appellants-defendants No.2 and 3?
(iii) Whether the first Appellate Court erred in reversing the finding on issue No.2 only because of the fact that appellants-defendants had preferred an application under Order IX Rule 13, CPC for setting aside of the ex-parte decree passed against them?
2. Admit. Issue notice. Issue notice of stay petition also.
Notices be filed in two sets. One set of notices be given 'dasti' to learned counsel for the appellants for service through registered post, acknowledgement due. Notices be made returnable within a period of four weeks.
Postal receipts of the 'dasti' notices be filed within a period of one week from the date of receipt of 'dasti' notices.
3. Call for the record.
4. Meanwhile, the effect and operation of the judgment and decree dated 28.07.2022 passed by District Judge, Pratapgarh in Civil Appeal No.17/2018 qua the present appellants shall remain stayed.
(REKHA BORANA),J 5-Sachin/-
(Downloaded on 25/05/2023 at 09:08:34 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)