Madhya Pradesh High Court
Vijendra Singh S/O Bharat Singhji ... vs Manohar Singh S/O Bharat Singh Ji ... on 28 June, 2022
Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
ON THE 28th OF JUNE, 2022
MISC. PETITION No. 6005 of 2019
Between:-
1. VIJENDRA SINGH S/O BHARAT SINGHJI
RATHORE (SINCE DECEASED) NOW LRS SMT.
NIKITA SINGH RATHORE W/O VIJENDRA
SINGH RATHORE OCCUPATION: HOUSE HOLD
VILLAGE PARA TEHSIL AND DISTT. JHABUA
(MADHYA PRADESH)
2. BRIJRAJ SINGH S/O VIJENDRA SINGH
RATHORE, AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: BUSINESS VILLAGE PARA TEH.
AND DIST. JHABUA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(RISHIRAJ TRIVEDI, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER)
AND
1. MANOHAR SINGH S/O BHARAT SINGH JI
RATHROE (SINCE DECEASED) NOW LRS SMT.
MEENALDEVI W/O LATE MANOHAR SINGH
RATHORE, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: HOUSE HOLD VILLAGE PARA
TEHSIL & DISTT JHABUA AND (MADHYA
PRADESH)
2. HARISH SINGH S/O LATE MANOHAR SINGH
RATHORE, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: ADVOCATE 2/3 SNEHLATAGANJ,
INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
3. NARENDRA SINGH S/O LATE MANOHARSINGH
RATHORE, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: ADVOCATE 2/3 SNEHLATAGANJ,
INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)
4. NARENDRA SINGH S/O LATE MANOHARSINGH
Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by
SAN VARGHESE
MATHEW
RATHORE SINCE DECEASED NOW LRS SMT.
Date: 2022.06.29
10:03:27 IST VEENAKUNWAR W/O LATE NARENDRA SINGH
RATHORE, AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS, VILLAGE
PARA TEH. AND DIST. JHABUA (MADHYA
2
PRADESH)
5. NARENDRA SINGH S/O LATE MANOHARSINGH
RATHORE SINCE DECEASED NOW LRS
PARMADITYA S/O NARENDRA SINGH
RATHORE, AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: STUDENT VILLAGE PARA TEH.
AND DIST. JHABUA (MADHYA PRADESH)
6. NARENDRA SINGH S/O LATE MANOHARSINGH
RATHORE SINCE DECEASED NOW LRS
KARANVEER S/O NARENDRA SINGH RATHORE,
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
STUDENT VILLAGE PARA TEH. AND DIST.
JHABUA (MADHYA PRADESH)
7. SMT. PRIYAVANDA W/O IRVENDRA SINGH
RATHORE D/O LATE BHARAT SINGHJI, AGED
ABOUT 46 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOUSEHOLD
SURAT (GUJARAT)
8. DR. LOKENDRA SINGH S/O LATE
BHARATSINGHJI RATHORE JHABUA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
9. MAHENDRA SINGH S/O LATE BHARATSINGH JI
RATHORE BARODARA (GUJARAT)
10. VIKRAM SINGH S/O LATE BHARATSINGHJI
R ATHOR E VILLAGE PARA TEH. AND DIST.
JHABUA (MADHYA PRADESH)
11. RAJENDRA SINGH S/O LATE BHARATSINGHJI
R ATHOR E VILLAGE PARA TEH. AND DIST.
JHABUA (MADHYA PRADESH)
12. SMT. CHANDRAKUNWAR W/O NARENDRA
SINGH CHANDRAWAT VIJAY NAGAR, INDORE
(MADHYA PRADESH)
13. SMT. JANAK KUNWAR W/O JITENDRA SINGH
MORYA BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)
14. THROUGH COLLECTOR JHABUA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by
.....RESPONDENTS
SAN VARGHESE
MATHEW
Date: 2022.06.29 (MS.SOUMYA MARU, PL FOR RESP.NO.14, SHRI V.K. JAIN, SR.
10:03:27 IST
ADVOCATE WITH SHRI P.KARPE, ADVOCATE FOR RESP.NO.2 &
SHRI A.S. PARIHAR, ADVOCATE FOR RESP.NO.7.
Th is petition coming on for orders this day, t h e court passed the
following:
ORDER
Heard on IA No.1678/2022 which is an application for dismissal of
petition.
The present petition is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India
being aggrieved by the order dated 3.10.2019 passed by I Addl. District Judge,
Jhabua in Civil Suit No.27A/2013 by which the trial court rejected the objection
of the petitioner permitting the plaintiff to mark the exhibit to the document in
question i.e. memorandum of partition.
Counsel for respondent submits that the suit itself has been decided and
decree has been passed on 9.12.2021.
Counsel for petitioner submits that this court has passed an interim order
on 8.12.2021 restraining the trial court from delivering final judgment in the
matter without leave of this Court.
Counsel for respondent No.2 submits that the aforesaid interim order was
not communicated and was not brought to the notice of the trial court. The said
order was uploaded in the website on 9.12.2021.
Without entering into the aforesaid dispute, since the civil suit itself has
been decided by the trial court and the matter is under Article 227 challenging
the interlocutory order passed by the trial court, the present petition does not
survive as the civil suit has already been decided by the trial court.
In view of aforesaid, IA No.1678/2022 is allowed and the present
petition is dismissed as having been rendered infructuous.
Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by
SAN VARGHESE
MATHEW
Date: 2022.06.29
10:03:27 IST
(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA)
JUDGE
VM
Signature Not Verified
VerifiedDigitally
Digitally signed by
SAN VARGHESE
MATHEW
Date: 2022.06.29
10:03:27 IST
