Dilip Kumar vs Ramesh Chandra Nagda
2021 Latest Caselaw 18677 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 107/2021

1. Dilip Kumar S/o Bhima Shankar Bhatt, Aged About 61 Years, Village And Post Office Pratapur, Tehsil Garhi, District Banswara

2. Bal Krishna S/o Bhima Shankar Bhatt, Aged About 64 Years, Village And Post Office Pratapur, Tehsil Garhi, District Banswara

3. Jai Prakash S/o Bhima Shankar Bhatt, Aged About 55 Years, Village And Post Office Pratapur, Tehsil Garhi, District Banswara

----Appellants Versus

1. Ramesh Chandra Nagda S/o Moti Lal, Jawahar Colony, Garhi, Tehsil Garhi, District Banswara

2. Mohammad Ali S/o Keeka Ali, Jawahar Colony, Garhi, Tehsil Garhi, District Banswara

3. Ishwar Lal Pareek S/o Sukh Lal Pareek, Jawahar Colony, Garhi, Tehsil Garhi, District Banswara

4. Jiva Ali S/o Ahmed Ali Sheikh, Nai Abadi, Bedwa, Tehsil Garhi, District Banswara

5. Banu Bai W/o Jiva Ali Sheikh, Nai Abadi, Bedwa, Tehsil Garhi, District Banswara

6. Mehfuja Bai W/o Zenul Abedeen, Nai Abadi, Bedwa, Tehsil Garhi, District Banswara

----Respondents

For Appellant(s) : Mr. C.S. Kotwani For Respondent(s) : --

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL

Order

08/12/2021

This second appeal has been filed assailing the judgment and

decree dated 29.09.2015 passed by the court of learned Civil

(2 of 2) [CSA-107/2021]

Judge, Garhi, District Banswara which has been affirmed in the

first appeal by the Court of learned District Judge, Banswara.

The appellants submit that they are in possession of the suit

property by virtue of various registered sale deeds, whereupon,

the respondents are inclined to enter into possession, therefore,

the civil suit for permanent injunction was filed. In the written

statement, the respondents while opposing the suit of plaintiffs,

submitted counter claim to get the possession of the disputed

property.

Learned counsel for appellants submits that although the

respondents did not file even the copy of map attached with their

sale deed to show that the disputed land falls within their

purchased area, however, the learned Courts below has decreed

the counter claim merely on the basis of Commissioner report,

prepared by the Tehsildar (Exhibit D 04). The report of the

Tehsildar has wrongly been made basis to adjudicate the

ownership and possessory rights of the parties.

Issue notice to the respondents of the appeal as also of the

stay application. Notices are made returnable within a period of

ten weeks.

Records of both the courts below have already been

summoned and received.

In the meanwhile and until further orders, the parties shall

maintain status quo in respect of the property marked as AIEDHG

in the Commissioner report (Exhibit D 04).

(SUDESH BANSAL),J

176-AnilKC/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)