Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Narendra Singh vs Sampat Mal Bothra on 7 December, 2021
Bench: Sudesh Bansal
`HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 109/2021
Narendra Singh S/o Laxmi Narayan Singh, Aged About 61 Years,
Ward No. 4, Udairamsar, Tehsil And Dis. Bikaner
----Appellant
Versus
1. Sampat Mal Bothra S/o Dhanraj, Udairamsar, Tehsil And
Dis. Bikaner At Present Resident Of Patharkandhi, Dis.
Kareemganj (Assam)
2. Lrs Of Laxmi Narayan Singh, Ward No. 4, Udairamsar,
Tehsil And Dis. Bikaner
2/1 Surji Devi W/o Laxmi Narayan Singh, Ward No. 4,
Udairamsar, Tehsil And Dis. Bikaner
2/2 Veerendra Singh S/o Laxmi Narayan Singh, Ward No. 4,
Udairamsar, Tehsil And Dis. Bikaner
2/3 Ravi Shanker Singh S/o Laxmi Narayan Singh, Ward No.
Udairamsar, Tehsil And Dis. Bikaner
2/4 Suvidha Devi D/o Laxmi Narayan Singh, Jaipur
2/5 Sunita Yadav D/o Laxmi Narayan Yadav, Jaipur
2/6 Praveen Yadav S/o Sheesh Ram Yadav, Gurgaon
(Haryana)
2/7 Mamta D/o Sheesh Ram Yadav, Village Oadwada, Tehsil
Aahore, Dis. Jalore
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Trilok Joshi
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Hemant Jain
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL
Order
07/12/2021
This first appeal has been filed by the appellant-defendant
No.1, assailing the judgment and decree dated 17.03.2021,
whereby the civil suit filed by the respondent No.1 for possession
(2 of 3) [CFA-109/2021]
has been decreed and the counter claim of the defendant No.1 has
been dismissed. The trial court while passing decree for possession
in favour of the respondent-plaintiff has also awarded mesne profit
@ of Rs.500/- per month with effect from the date of filing of the
suit, i.e. from 18.02.1999, until the delivery of possession.
Mr. Hemant Jain, learned counsel for the respondent No.1-
plaintiff puts in appearance as caveator. As far as respondent Nos.
2/1 to 2/7 are concerned, they are performa respondent, being
co-defendant with the appellant before trial court.
At the request of counsel for the appellant service of notice
of respondent Nos.2/1 to 2/7 is dispensed with. Thus, no need to
issue notice
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Admit.
Heard on stay petition.
In case, the appellant deposits the decreetal amount as
ordered in the impugned decree within a period of four weeks and
continue to make payment of mesne profit @ of Rs.500 per month
to the respondent-plaintiff, the execution of the impugned decree
as to possession shall remain stayed during the course of appeal.
Further, the parties are also directed to maintain status quo in
relation to the property.
If the respondent No.1-plaintiff furnishes his bank account
details to the appellant, the appellant is directed to pay mesne
profit in the given bank account of respondent No.1.
The stay application is disposed of accordingly.
Learned counsel for the respondent No.1 submits that as the
suit was filed way back in the year 1999, therefore, mesne profit
was awarded only @ of Rs.500/- per month, so he wants to file
(3 of 3) [CFA-109/2021]
application for enhancement of the mesne profit for the period at
least separate during the course of appeal. Liberty is granted to
file such application, if he so desires.
(SUDESH BANSAL),J
17-Taruna/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
