Saurabh Kumar vs Dharam Chand Agrawal
2021 Latest Caselaw 1051 Chatt

             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                                FA No. 45 of 2021
   Saurabh Kumar S/o Shri Uttamchand Jain Aged About 29 Years R/o Ramadheen
    Road, Rajnandgaon Tehsil And District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh., District :
    Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh
                                                                   ---- Appellant
                                       Versus
 1. Dharam Chand Agrawal S/o Late Shri Lakshmi Narayan Agrawal Occupation -
    Business, R/o Lohaar Para, Rajnandgaon, Tehsil And District Rajnandgaon
    Chhattisgarh., District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh
 2. Uttamchand Jain S/o Shri Nemi Chand Jain Aged About 66 Years Occupation
    Labour, Residing At Ujrodha, Tehsil Raghurajnagar, District Satna (Madhya
    Pradesh)., District : Satna, Madhya Pradesh
 3. Authorized Representative Icici Bank Limited Registered Office Landmark, Race
    Course Circle, Badodara, Gujrat., District : Baroda, Gujarat
                                                                ----Respondents

    2                                Through Video Conference

12.07.2021           Shri Amit Kumar Singh, counsel for the Appellant.

Shri Akash Shrivastava, counsel for Respondent No.1, on

Caveat.

Heard on admission.

Admit.

Issue notice to Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 only, on payment

of P.F. as per rules.

Also heard on I.A.No.1/2021, an application filed under

Order 41 Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for grant of

stay.

It is contended by learned counsel for the Appellant while referring to the Registered Deed of Sale dated 21.3.1988 that the

property in question is held by Defendant No.2-Saurabh Kumar

Jain, who was a minor and without obtaining prior permission from

the concerned District Judge, as required under Section 8 of the

Hindu Minority & Guardianship Act, 1956, the same has been sold

by his father -Uttamchand Jain as a guardian of him to the Plaintiff-

Dharam Chand Agrawal on 31.10.2001. It is contended further

that since the alleged sale was made in violation of the said

provisions, therefore, no right, title or interest would confer upon

the Plaintiff- Dharam Chand Agrawal. He, therefore, prays for

staying the effect and operation of the impugned judgment and

decree pending decision of this appeal.

On the other hand, Shri Shrivastava, learned counsel

appearing for Respondent No.1/Plaintiff, has opposed the said

application.

On due consideration of the contention of learned counsel

for the parties, I am inclined to allow this application.

The application is allowed and it is directed that the effect

and operation of the impugned judgment and decree dated

15.3.2021 passed by the 3rd Additional District Judge, Raipur,

District Raipur(CG) in Civil Suit No.30-A/2013 shall remain stayed

until further orders subject to the Appellant's furnishing security amount of Rs.25,000/- before the concerned executing Court

within the period of two months from today for due performance of

the decree ultimately to be passed by this Court.

I.A.No.1/2021, thus, stands disposed of.

Call for the records of the court below and post this matter

after five weeks for further orders.

Sd/-

(Sanjay S. Agrawal) Judge

sunita