Lalchand vs J.K. White Cement Works Ltd
2021 Latest Caselaw 16308 Raj

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S. B. Civil Second Appeal No. 166/2018

Lalchand S/o Shri Onkarlal, aged about 55 years, By caste Brahmin, R/o Quarter No. 105, Colony Nagar 2 J.K. White Cement Quarter, Gotan, Tehsil Menta, District Nagaur

----Appellant Versus

1. J.K. White Cement Works Limited, Gotan through General Manager, J.K. White Cement Works Limited, Gotan, Tehsil Merta, District Nagaur

2. J.K. White Cement Works Limited, Gotan through General Manager (Personal), J.K. White Cement Works Limited, Gotan, Tehsil Merta, District Nagaur

----Respondents

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Chetan Prakash Soni

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMESHWAR VYAS

Order

27/10/2021

This civil second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of

Civil Procedure has been preferred by plaintiff-appellant against

the Judgment and Decree dated 09.05.2018 passed by the

Additional District Judge, Merta in Civil Appeal Decree No. 01/2017

(Lalchand Vs. J.K. White Cement Works Limited & Anr.) whereby

first appeal preferred by plaintiff-appellant against Judgment and

Decree dated 03.12.2016 passed by Civil Judge, Merta in Civil

Original Suit No. 36/2009 (Lalchand Vs. J.K. White Cement Works

Limited & Anr.) dismissing the suit for permanent injunction filed

by plaintiff-appellant, was dismissed.

The brief facts of the case in short are that plaintiff-appellant

filed the civil suit for permanent injunction against his employer,

(2 of 3) [CSA-166/2018]

defendants-respondents herein, with the prayer that he may not

be evicted from residential quarter allotted to him as an employee

by defendant - Cement Company. Suit was contested by

defendants-respondents on the ground that services of plaintiff

had already been terminated. After trial, the trial court dismissed

the suit of plaintiff-appellant vide Judgment and Decree dated

03.12.2016. Aggrieved by same, plaintiff-appellant preferred first

appeal before the Additional District Judge, Merta, which was also

dismissed vide Judgment and Decree dated 09.05.2018. Hence,

this second appeal has been preferred by plaintiff-appellant before

this Court.

As per averments made in the memo of appeal, the findings

arrived at by the Courts below are contradictory. Undertaking

(Ex.A/2) of plaintiff relied upon by the Courts below ceased to its

effect with the termination of plaintiff, which is under challenge;

the plaintiff has not filed suit for possession, rather, he filed suit

for injunction against his wrongful dispossession and wrongful

discontinuance of facilities like gas and education facilities to his

children.

Heard learned counsel for the plaintiff-appellant and perused

the material available on record as well as judgments impugned

passed by the Courts below.

After perusal of memo of appeal and having regard to the

submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant, this Court

is of the opinion that this appeal does not involve any substantial

question of law. There are concurrent findings of both the Courts

below. This Court finds no reason to differ from the concurrent

findings arrived at by two Courts below.

(3 of 3) [CSA-166/2018]

In this view of the matter, this Court finds no ground to

interfere in the judgments and decrees impugned passed by both

the Courts below.

The civil second appeal being devoid of any merit is

dismissed at the admission stage.

(RAMESHWAR VYAS),J

12-Inder/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)