Gendalal vs Narsingh Ji Mandir
2023 Latest Caselaw 12200 MP

                                                      1
                          IN    THE     HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                             AT JABALPUR
                                                  BEFORE
                                    HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJAY DWIVEDI
                                           ON THE 1 st OF AUGUST, 2023
                                         WRIT PETITION No. 20935 of 2016

                         BETWEEN:-
                         GENDALAL S/O KUNJILAL GAUR, AGED ABOUT 75
                         YEARS, VILLAGE CHEEPABAD, TEH KHIRKIYA, HARDA
                         (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                            .....PETITIONER
                         (BY SHRI AVINASH ZARGAR - ADVOCATE)

                         AND
                         1.    NARSINGH JI MANDIR THROUGH NEXT FRIENDS
                               (1) SURESH S/O PADAM SINGH MEENA AGED-47
                               YEARS

                               1(2) RAMESH S/O PADAM SINGH MEENA, AGED
                               ABOUT 44 YEARS

                               1(3) SARJO BAI D/O PADAM SINGH MEENA, AGED
                               ABOUT 33 YEARS

                               1(4) SHANTA BAI WD/O LATE PADAM SINGH
                               MEENA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS,

                         2.    KISHORILAL   S/O   JAGANNATH     MEENA
                               DESHWARLI, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, R/O VILL
                               CHEEPABAD, TEH KHIRKIYA, HARDA (MADHYA
                               PRADESH)

                         3.    STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH
                               SECRETARY,  DEPARTMENT   OF  REVENUE
                               SURVEY AND SETTLEMENT VALLABH BAHWAN,
                               BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                         4.    COLLECTOR CUM REGISTRAR PUBLIC TRUST,
                               HARDA DISTT. HARDA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                         5.    SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER (REVENUE) KHIRKIYA,
                               DIST HARDA (MADHYA PRADESH)
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: SUSHMA
KUSHWAHA
Signing time: 8/3/2023
4:34:04 PM
                                                             2
                         6.    TEHSILDAR KHIRKIYA, DIST. HARDA (MADHYA
                               PRADESH)

                         7.    DEPUTY REGISTRAR OFFICE OF REGISTRAR
                               HARDA DISTT. HARDA (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                      .....RESPONDENTS
                         (BY SHRI PUNIT SHROTI - GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE- FOR STATE)
                         (BY SHRI L.N.SANKLE FOR RESPONDENT NO.1 AND 2)

                               Th is petition coming on for hearing this day, th e court passed the
                         following:
                                                             ORDER

Counsel for the petitioner submits that this petition has been filed against the proceeding initiated by Sub Divisional Officer at the instance of respondent

no.1 in pursuance to the decree granted in his favour.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that decree was never put in execution and only on application submitted before the Sub Divisional Officer he initiated proceeding whereas according to him the said proceeding could be initiated only in pursuance to the execution proceeding and, therefore, the exercise carried out by the Sub Divisional Officer is without his jurisdiction. He submits that in view of the interim order granted by this Court, the Sub Divisional Officer has suspended the proceeding. He has also informed this Court that the appeal against the judgment and decree passed in favour of the respondent no.1 is also pending. However two appeals were preferred against the said judgment and decree and both are pending in the High Court.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that in the pending appeal before the High Court, by way of interim order it is directed that the parties shall maintain status quo. He submits that he would pursue the appeal. However, SDO be restrained to initiate any proceeding in pursuant to the judgment and decree

Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUSHMA KUSHWAHA Signing time: 8/3/2023 4:34:04 PM

granted in favour of respondent no.1.

Considering the aforesaid, without commenting anything on merit, I am disposing of this petition directing Sub Divisional Officer not to initiate any proceeding directly on an application submitted by respondent no.1 in pursuance to the judgment and decree passed which is subject matter of pending First Appeal Nos.162/2016 and 172/2016 in which order of status quo has been granted.

It is further directed that parties may move an application before the Court for early hearing of the First appeal and whatever order is passed in the pending appeals, the same would govern the subsequent proceeding if any is to be initiated in pursuance to the order passed by the High Court.

Counsel for the petitioner further submits that SDO on his own cannot initiate proceeding only in pursuance to the application submitted by the decree holder. However, he submits that only by virtue of execution proceeding SDO can exercise the jurisdiction to initiate proceeding. Although, I am not giving any finding on the question raised by counsel for the petitioner, however, the petitioner is at liberty to raise that question as and when occasion arises.

Petition is disposed of.

(SANJAY DWIVEDI) JUDGE sushma

Signature Not Verified Signed by: SUSHMA KUSHWAHA Signing time: 8/3/2023 4:34:04 PM