Raghav Gandhi S/O Kunal Gandhi And ... vs Sudhir Gandhi S/O Late Shri C. V. ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 5954 Raj/2

          HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                      BENCH AT JAIPUR

                S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 474/2022

Raghav Gandhi S/o Kunal Gandhi And Pooja Gandhi,
                                                                    ----Appellant
                                    Versus
  Sudhir Gandhi & Ors.
                                                                 ----Respondents

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Anuroop Singhi Mr. O.P. Pareek Mr. Bhaskar Agarwal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Alok Jain with Mr. Dikshit Jain

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL

Order

27/08/2022

Appellant-plaintiff has preferred this first appeal against the

judgment and decree dated 21.04.2022 passed by Additional

District Judge No.9, in Civil Suit no.48/2019 (315/2019), whereby

and whereunder his civil suit for partition and permanent

injunction has been dismissed.

Respondents have appeared as Caveator.

Heard.

Admit.

Issue notice.

Since respondents have put in appearance, no need to issue

notice.

Record of the court below be summoned.

Heard on the stay application.

(2 of 2) [CFA-474/2022]

The appellant is claiming 1/8th share in the suit property

comprising one house No.E-29-A, Sumitra Path, Banipark, Jaipur

and a shop No.219, Pinkcity Tower, Jhotwara Road, Near Doodh

Misthan Bhandar, Jaipur. The claim of appellant-plaintiff is that the

suit property is co-partionary property and he has 1/8th

undevided share therein. The trial court has examined the nucleus

of suit property and has categorically observed that the suit

property does not partake character of co-partionary, if it is a

parental property of plaintiff, the plaintiff's father is alive,

therefore, the plaintiff does not has any right since birth in the suit

property.

The counsel for appellant does not dispute the fact that the

suit property is in actual and physical possession of respondents.

In view of such findings, no prima facie case for grant of

interim stay is made out. Since, the first appeal has been

admitted. It may be observed that in case respondents would

alienate/transfer the suit property, the transfer would remain

subject to principle of lis pendens enshrined under Section 52 of

the Transfer of Property Act.

Stay application stands disposed of.

(SUDESH BANSAL),J

TN/22

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)