Mangal Das vs Amar Singh And Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 2803 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

               S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 596/2005

Mangal Das
                                                                      ----Appellant
                                      Versus
Amar Singh And Ors
                                                                   ----Respondents

For Appellant(s)            :     None present
For Respondent(s)           :     Mr. Aditya Jain
                                  Ms. Bhavna Golecha
                                  Ms. Neha Gyamlani



            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL

                                       Order

01/04/2022

In this second appeal, no one appeared for appellant on

11.03.2022, thereafter, the matter was listed before this court on

30.03.2022 for final hearing but again no one appeared for and on

behalf of appellant.

Today, again no one has put in appearance for the appellant.

From the record, it transpires that this appeal has been filed by

the tenant, assailing the decree for eviction dated 29.08.2002 passed

by Civil Judge (Jr. Division), North Ajmer on the ground of default in

payment of rent of the rented premises shop, which is in tenancy of the

appellant at the rate of Rs.150/- per month and the eviction suit was

led on 26.11.1983. The judgment of the trial court has been upheld by

Additional District Judge No.3, Ajmer in appeal No. 158/2002 vide

judgment dated 02.09.2005.

This court vide order dated 25.11.2005 framed substantial

questions of law and posted the first appeal for hearing in month of

January, 2006. Interim stay for staying the execution of decree for

(2 of 2) [CSA-596/2005]

eviction was also passed. Though, final order on such stay application

has not yet been passed.

Perusal of order sheets shows that thereafter from the side of

appellant, hearing of appeal was evaded for one or other reasons.

Although, the respondent-landlord made several efforts for hearing of

appeal by moving applications for early hearing of this appeal.

At one point of time, the matter was also sent for mediation, but

the mediation remained unsettled. The tenancy of tenant-appellant is

old and eviction matter is pending since 1983 despite concurrent

findings against tenant. The conduct of counsel for appellant of not

pursuing appeal on merits is despicable.

In such circumstances, the appeal is dismissed in default and for

non-prosecution. The interim stay order dated 25.11.2005 also stands

vacated and the stay application stands dismissed. Now respondent-

landlord shall be free to execute the eviction decree.

It is made clear that in case appellant-tenant moves an

application for restoration of this appeal, the restoration application

shall be considered, taking into account his previous conduct of delay

in not prosecuting this appeal for hearing and if the restoration

application is allowed, the restoration of appeal, ipso facto would not

restore the interim stay order. This court will consider the grant of stay

order on the execution of eviction decree afresh.

(SUDESH BANSAL),J

Sachin/75

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)