Rajasthan High Court
Nasruddin S/O Vajira vs Kajod S/O Mangilal on 24 August, 2022
Bench: Sudesh Bansal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Misc. Stay Application No.487/2022
In
S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 89/2022
1. Nasruddin S/o Vajira, Aged About 73 Years, R/o Karmoda,
Tehsil And District Sawai Madhopur (Deceased) Through
Legal Heirs.
1/1. Jaitun Wd/o Nasruddin,
1/2. Ruksar S/o Nasruddin,
1/3. Juver S/o Nasruddin,
1/4. Aksam S/o Nasruddin,
1/5. Afsar S/o Nasruddin,
All R/o Karmoda, Tehsil And District Sawai Madhopur.
1/6. Aalma
1/7. Jayda
1/8 Afroj
1/9. Afsara
All D/o Nasruddin, R/o Karmoda, Tehsil And District Sawai
Madhopur.
---Plaintiffs-Appellants
Versus
1. Kajod
2. Nandkishore
3. Narotam
4. Jainarayan
5. Jagannath
All S/o Mangilal, R/o Karmoda, Tehsil And District Sawai
Mahdopur
6. Harkesh
7. Ramkesh
8. Mukesh
9. Balram
All S/o Nenu, R/o Village Lodipura Tehsil And District
Sawai Madhopur
---Defendants-Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Amit Jindal
Mr. Ashindra Gautam
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Tarun Jain
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL
(2 of 4)
Order
24/08/2022
1. The first appeal has already been admitted.
2. Heard on the stay application.
3. Appellants have preferred this first appeal against the
dismissal of their suit for specific performance in relation to the
agricultural land of Khasra No.12/3 measuring 1 bigha 10 biswa
situated at village Lodhipura, Tehsil and District Sawai Madhopur.
4. Learned counsel for appellants submits that the land of
Khasra No.12/3 was agreed to sell to Nasruddin, original plaintiff
after receiving the full sale consideration of amount Rs.60,000/-,
an agreement to sale deed dated 01.02.1999 was executed and
possession was delivered. Later on, the original Khatedar
defendants No.6 to 9, executed a sale deed dated 12.07.2001 in
favour of defendants No.1 to 5 in relation to Khasra Nos.12/1,
12/3, 12/5, 12/7, 14/5, 14/7 and 14/496 total measuring 12
bigha and 6 biswa and in that sale deed the land of Khasra
No.12/3 measuring 1 bigha and 10 biswa has also included.
5. Learned counsel for appellants submits that since the land of
Khasra No.12/3, the actual possession had already been delivered
to the original plaintiff-Nasruddin, his possession remained
continue throughout even after the sale deed dated 12.07.2001
including khasra No.12/3 was executed in favour of the defendant
No.1 to 5.
6. Learned counsel for appellants has drawn attention of this
Court to the statement of PW-2-Salim, who is witness of the sale
agreement dated 01.02.1999. He categorically stated that over
the land of Khasra No.12/3, the plaintiff-Nasruddin is in actual
possession and cultivation.
(3 of 4)
7. In Cross examination, this witnesse remained static. In
rebuttle evidence, DW/2-Nand Kishore, who is defendant No.2 and
one of the co-purchasers in sale deed dated 12.07.2001 did not
depose any rebuttle evidence, denying the possession of the
plaintiff over this land of Khasra No.12/3.
On the contrary, in cross-examination a suggestive question
was put to him that the plaintiff-Nasruddin is in cultivation and
possession over the land of Khasra No.12/3 since 01.02.1999, it
means from the date of agreement but the defendant No.2
declined to give the answer and gave evasive answer that he does
not know.
8. With the aforesaid evidence, it appears that the possession
over the land in Khasra No.12/3 measuring 1 bigha and 10 biswa
is at present lying with appellants. The trial court in the impugned
judgment, while discussing the issue of possession, has not
adhered to the evidence of PW/2 and DW/2 as discussed
hereinabove and only on the basis of a registered sale deed dated
12.07.2001 in favour of defendant No.1 to 5 has assumed their
possession over the land of Khasra No.12/3 also.
9. Heard learned counsel for both parties, having considered
the material available on record, this Court deems it just and
proper that during the course of first appeal, both parties shall
maintain status quo in relation to alienation and possession of
Khasra No.12/3 measuring 1 bigha and 10 biswa situated at
village Lodhipura, Tehsil and District Sawai Madhopur, as it exists
today.
10. It is made clear that the findings in the present order are
only recorded to examine prima facie case of appellants, to decide
the stay application and the findings of this order would not affect
(4 of 4)
the rights of either parties at the time of hearing the first appeal
on merits.
11. Stay application stands disposed of accordingly.
(SUDESH BANSAL),J
TN/29
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
