Mohini Bai Paliwal vs Harish Bajaj
2022 Latest Caselaw 6957 MP

                           -1-
                                          First Appeal No.28 of 2007



       IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                       AT INDORE
                        BEFORE
          HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ANIL VERMA

                ON THE 9th OF MAY, 2022
               FIRST APPEAL No. 28 of 2007
  Between:-
  MOHINIBAI PALIWAL (DECEASED)
  LATE SHRI NARAYANJI PALIWAL
  THROUGH LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES:

1. DR. LILADHAR PALIWAL,
  S/O NARAYANJI PALIWA,
  AGED - 70 YEARS, OCCUPATION : AGRICULTURIST,

2. SMT. MEERA W/O DR. LILADHARJI PALIWAL,
  AGED - 68 YEARS,

3. MANOJ KUMAR S/O DR. LILADHARJI PALIWAL,
  AGED - 44 YEARS,

4. SMT. NISHA W/O MANOJ KUMAR PALIWAL,
  AGED - 38 YEARS,

5. KU. AKANKSHA D/O MANOJ KUMAR PALIWAL,
  AGED - 17 YEARS,

6. KU. RASHI D/O MANOJ KUMAR PALIWAL,
  AGED - 16 YEARS,

7. ADITYA S/O MANOJ KUMAR PALIWAL,
  AGED - 06 YEARS,
  APPELLANTS NO.5 TO 7 ARE REPRESENTED
  THROUGH THEIR NATURAL GUARDIAN
  SMT. NISHA W/O MANOJ KUMAR
                            -2-
                                         First Appeal No.28 of 2007



  ALL R/O - VILLAGE KHAJRANA,
  TEH AND DISTRICT INDORE (M.P.)
                                             .....APPELLANTS
  (BY SHRI B. S. GANDHI, ADVOCATE)

  AND

1. HARISH BAJAJ S/O LATE SHRI DEEPCHANDJI,
  AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
  OCCUPATION: BUSINESS,
  R/O 38, GULMARG COLONY,
  INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

2. BHARTI DEVIHARISH BAJAJ,
  AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
  OCCUPATION: HOUSEHOLD,
  R/O GULMARG COLONY,
  INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

3. MANISH BAJAJ S/O HARISH BAJAJ,
  AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
  OCCUPATION: BUSINESS,
  R/O GULMARG COLONY,
  INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

4. MANJEET KAUR S/O SURJEET SINGH BHATIA,
  AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS,
  OCCUPATION: HOUSEHOLD,
  R/O 9, GULMARG COLONY,
  INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

5. MANORAMA S/O NARESH MAHESHWARI,
  AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
  OCCUPATION: HOUSEHOLD,
  R/O 31, MAIN STREET, MANGLAM,
  MHOW,DIST. INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

6. DINESH MAHESHWARI S/O KRISHNAGOPAL,
  AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS,
  R/O 31, MAIN STREET, MANGLAM,
                            -3-
                                           First Appeal No.28 of 2007



  MHOW, DIST. INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

7. PRADUMN MAHESHWARI S/O KRISHNAGOPAL,
  AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
  R/O 31, MAIN STREET, MANGLAM,
  MHOW, DIST. INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

8. NAROTTAM MAHESHWARI S/O KRISHNAGOPAL,
  AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
  R/O 31,MAIN STREET, MANGLAM,
  MHOW, DIST. INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

9. PUSHPA JAGMOHAN LAHOTI,
  AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,
  OCCUPATION: HOUSEHOLD
  R/O 33, BAKSHI BAG, YASLOK HOSPITAL,
  VEER SAVARKAR MARG,
  INDORE. (MADHYA PRADESH)

10. SHARDA MAHESHWARI.
  S/O UMESH CHANDRA MAHESHWARI,
  AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS,
  OCCUPATION: HOUSEHOLD,
  R/O 31, MAIN STREET, MANGLAM,
  MHOW, DIST. INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

11. RAJESH S/O JAGMOHAN LAHOTI,
  AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS,
  OCCUPATION: BUSINESS,
  R/O 33, BAKSHI GALI, YASHLOK HOSPITAL,
  VEER SAWARKAR MARKET,
  INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

12. KAMLESH S/O JAGMOHAN LAHOTI,
  AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS,
  OCCUPATION: BUSINESS,
  R/O 33, BAKSHI GALI, YASHLOK HOSPITAL,
  VEER SAWARKAR MARKET,
  INDORE (MADHYA PRADESH)

13. LAXMINARAYAN LAHOTI,
                                -4-
                                               First Appeal No.28 of 2007



   S/O BANSHIDHAR LAHOTI,
   AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS,
   OCCUPATION: BUSINESS,
   R/O 126, SHIVAJI PARK COLONY,
   UJJAIN. (MADHYA PRADESH)

14. VIJAYALAXMI ASHOK SOMANI,
   AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS,
   OCCUPATION: HOUSEHOLD,
   R/O 12, TARANG APARTMENT, PLOT NO.19,
   R.P. EXCESSION, SAFDARGANJ (NEW DELHI)

15. STATE OF M. P.,
   THROUGH THE COLLECTOR,
   DIST. INDORE. (MADHYA PRADESH)
                                                .....RESPONDENTS
   (NONE FOR THE RESPONDENTS)

      This First Appeal coming on this day for orders, the court
passed the following:
                        JUDGMENT

Heard on IA.no.4537/2021, which is an application under Order XXII Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

It is submitted that legal representatives No.1 of deceased appellant namely Liladhar Paliwal has been died on 28/04/2021. His legal representatives are already on record, therefore, IA.No.4537/2021 is allowed and appellant is permitted to delete the name of legal representative No.1 Liladhar Paliwal from the array of the appeal memo. Counsel for the appellant is directed to carry out necessary amendment during the course of the day.

Also heard on IA.No.3144/2022, which is an application for withdrawal of the appeal.

First Appeal No.28 of 2007

Counsel for the appellants submitted that parties have entered into compromise and matter has been settled out of the Court, therefore, appellants be permitted to withdraw this appeal.

Considering the fact that matter has already been compromised between the parties out of the Court, IA.No.3144/2022 is allowed and appellants are permitted to withdraw this appeal.

Accordingly, this first appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. Certified copy as per rules.

(ANIL VERMA) JUDGE Tej

Digitally signed by TEJPRAKASH VYAS Date: 2022.05.09 19:47:11 +05'30'