Kanishtha Abhiyanta (Rural) vs Sunita W/O Late Rajendra Prasad
2021 Latest Caselaw 3397 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

                S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 857/2019

Kanishtha Abhiyanta (Rural) & Ors.
                                                                  ----Appellants
                                   Versus
Sunita & Ors.
                                                                ----Respondents

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Abhay Jain, Advocate (through VC) For Respondent(s) : Mr. Amit Punia, Advocate

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH GUPTA

Order

03/08/2021

Matter comes up on an application seeking extension of

time in depositing the amount pursuant to the order dated

3.10.2019 passed by this Court.

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that vide

order dated 3.10.2019, this Court stayed execution of the

impugned judgment and decree dated 31.5.2019 passed by the

Trial Court, provided the appellants deposit the entire decretal

amount with the Trial Court within three months from the date of

the order. He further submits that Head Office of the appellants is

located at Ajmer and on account of administrative exigency

previous Officer Incharge was transferred, therefore, the order

dated 3.10.2019 could not be complied with, within the stipulated

time. He prays for one month's time for depositing the decretal

amount alongwith interest.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents

has opposed the same and submits that vide order dated

(2 of 2) [CFA-857/2019]

3.10.2019 passed by this Court, execution of the impugned

judgment and decree dated 31.5.2019 passed by the Trial Court

was stayed, provided the appellants deposit the decretal amount

with the Trial Court within three months from the date of the order

and the respondent no.1 was granted liberty to withdraw the

amount of Rs. 9,53,172/- in the event such amount is deposited

by the appellants. He further submits that the order was passed

on 3.10.20219, whereas the application has been filed on

3.5.2021. In this way, the instant application has been filed after

about 2 years from the date of passing the order dated 3.10.2019.

He further submits that neither any record has been produced to

substantiate the averments made in the application nor any

sufficient reason has been given. Hence, the application filed by

the appellants being bereft of any material particulars deserves

dismissal.

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and

taking into consideration, the facts and circumstances of the case,

more particularly in view of the fact that the application has been

filed after about 2 years from the date of passing the order dated

3.10.2019, no case is made out for extension of time in depositing

the amount.

The application is accordingly dismissed.

(PRAKASH GUPTA),J

DILIP KHANDELWAL /28

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)