Banwari Lal Sharma Son Of Shri ... vs Agarwal Samaj Sansthan Ajitgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 668 Raj/2

     HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                 BENCH AT JAIPUR

            S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 619/2021

1.   Banwari Lal Sharma Son Of Shri Bansidhar Sharma, Aged
     About 69 Years, Resident Of Mangarh, Tehsil Srimadhopur
     District Sikar (Rajasthan)
2.   Kailash Chand Son Of Shri Jagdish Prasad, Aged About 61
     Years, Resident Of Ajitgarh, Tehsil Srimadhopur, District
     Sikar (Rajasthan )
3.   Sitaram Son Of Shri Jagdish Prasad, Aged About 59
     Years, Resident Of Ajitgarh, Tehsil Srimadhopur, District
     Sikar (Rajasthan )
4.   Smt. Pushpa Devi Wife Of Late Shri Hari Narain Gupta,
     Aged   About    63     Years,      Resident        Of    Ajitgarh,   Tehsil
     Srimadhopur, District Sikar (Rajasthan )
5.   Mukesh Son Of Late Shri Hari Narain Gupta, Aged About
     39 Years, Resident Of Ajitgarh, Tehsil Srimadhopur,
     District Sikar (Rajasthan )
6.   Kamlesh Son Of Late Shri Hari Narain Gupta, Aged About
     37 Years, Resident Of Ajitgarh, Tehsil Srimadhopur,
     District Sikar (Rajasthan )
7.   Sumit Son Of Late Shri Hari Narain Gupta, Aged About 35
     Years, Resident Of Ajitgarh, Tehsil Srimadhopur, District
     Sikar (Rajasthan )
                                                                ----Petitioners
                                Versus
1.   Agarwal Samaj Sansthan Ajitgarh, Through President Shri
     Kedarmal   Nausadar,         Son      Of    Shri        Bhagwaan     Sahai,
     Resident Of Aligarh, District Sikar At Present Resident Of
     Plot No. 23, Soni Ka Bagh, Behind Alka Theater, Sikar
     Road, Jaipur
2.   Kedarmal   Nausadar,         Son      Of    Shri        Bhagwaan     Sahai,
     Resident Of Aligarh, District Sikar At Present Resident Of
     Plot No. 23, Soni Ka Bagh, Behind Alka Theater, Sikar
     Road, Jaipur
3.   Mukesh Allias Tilya Nagoliya Sonof Shri Maliram, Resident
     Of Ajitgarh, District Sikar At Present C/o Ms. Mohan Lal
     Shyam Sunder, Main Market Ajitgarh, Sikar 332701
4.   Sanwarmal Dikhni Son Of Shri Madan Lal, Resident Of


                 (Downloaded on 27/01/2021 at 09:53:58 PM)
                                             (2 of 3)                 [CW-619/2021]


        Ajitgarh, District Sikar At Present C/o Ms. Shyam Trading
        Company Main Market, Ajitgarh, Sikar 332701
                                                                 ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sudesh Bansal, Adv.

Mr. Mohd. Adil, Adv.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR GAUR

Order

22/01/2021

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the Civil

Court by order dated 21.12.2018 decided temporary injunction

application filed by the petitioners-plaintiffs.

Learned counsel submitted that all three parameters for

grant of temporary injunction were considered in detail by the Civil

Court while passing the order dated 21.12.2018 and order was

passed for maintaining status-quo in respect of disputed property

and record of the said property.

Learned counsel submitted that on an appeal being filed by

the defendants-respondents, the Appellate Court by impugned

order dated 05.01.2021, has set-aside the order passed by the

Civil Court.

Learned counsel submitted that the Appellate Court has

committed serious illegality in interfering with the order of the

Civil Court.

Learned counsel submitted that the Civil Court while passing

the order, recorded its findings on the basis of material available

before it and such finds were neither perverse nor capricious or

based on misreading of the pleadings or evidence.

(3 of 3) [CW-619/2021]

Learned counsel submitted that the Appellate Court has, in

fact, recorded its own conclusion and has given finding with

respect to different pleas taken by the parties in respect of

ownership and title of the property, while deciding the case.

Learned counsel submitted that this Court in the case of The

Rajasthan State Electricity Board Versus Mool Chand

Jangir, 1993 (3) WLC (Raj.) 338 has explained the jurisdiction

of the Appellate Court to interfere with the order of injunction

passed by the Trial Court and it has been laid down that the

Appellate Court cannot set-aside the order of the Trial Court

merely because on an appreciation of the pleadings and the

evidence, it may form an opinion other than the one formed by

the Trial Court.

Learned counsel also places reliance on a judgment passed

by the Apex Court in the case of Mohd. Mehtab Khan & Ors.

Versus Khushnuma Ibrahim Khan & Ors., (2013) 9

Supreme Court Cases 221.

Issue notice of the writ petition as well as stay application,

returnable on 25.02.2021. Notices be given 'dasti' if prayed.

In the meanwhile, the parties are directed to maintain

status-quo in respect of the suit property.

(ASHOK KUMAR GAUR),J

Ramesh Vaishnav/86/Himanshu Soni

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)