Harish Chand S/O Shri Tilliram vs Smt Anguri Devi W/O Shri Dwarka ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 231 Raj/2

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                  BENCH AT JAIPUR

             S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 177/2019

Harish Chand S/o Shri Tilliram, R/o Village Basskripal Nagar,
Tehsil Kishangarhbass, District Alwar, Rajasthan.
                                                         ----Petitioner/Plaintiff
                                   Versus
1.     Smt Anguri Devi W/o Shri Dwarka Prasad Sharma
2.     Mahesh Sharma S/o Shri Dwarka Prasad Sharma
3.     Yogesh Sharma S/o Shri Dwarka Prasad Sharma
4.     Kamlesh Sharma S/o Shri Dwarka Prasad Sharma
5.     Mukesh Sharma S/o Shri Dwarka Prasad Sharma
       All Resident of Kishangarh Bass, Tehsil Kishangarh Bass,
       District Alwar, Rajasthan.
                                               ----Respondents/Defendants

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. G.S. Rathore, Advocate (through VC) For Respondent(s) : Mr. R.K. Mathur, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Aditya Kiran Mathur, Advocate (through VC)

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH GUPTA

Order

11/01/2022

This revision petition has been filed by the petitioner-

plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as 'the plaintiff') against the

judgment dated 30.05.2019 passed by the Trial Court, whereby

the suit for permanent injunction filed by the plaintiff 1963 has

been dismissed.

Facts of the case are that the plaintiff filed a suit for

permanent injunction under the Specific Relief Act, 1963, wherein

it was averred that he is doing the business of selling and

purchasing the utensils at the suit shop since the year 1972. The

(2 of 3) [CR-177/2019]

suit shop was taken on rent by him in the year 1972 from the

husband of defendant no.1 and father of defendants no. 2 to 5 on

monthly rent of Rs. 800/- and the tenancy was oral tenancy.

The defendants filed their written statement and denied

the averments made in the plaint.

Necessary issues were framed and after hearing the

arguments, the Trial Court vide its judgment dated 30.5.2019 has

dismissed the plaintiff's suit. Hence, this revision petition.

Learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that total 9

issues were framed by the trial court, but the trial court gave its

finding on 6 issues, out of which issues no. 5 and 6 were also

decided in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants. He

further submits that without considering the material evidence on

record, the impugned judgment has been passed, therefore, the

same is liable to be quashed and set-aside.

Learned counsel for the defendants defended the

impugned judgment and stated the same to be just and proper.

Heard. Considered.

From a perusal of the impugned judgment passed by

the trial court, it is evident that without giving issue-wise finding

and without considering and appreciating the material evidence on

record, the impugned judgment has been passed. The judgment

passed by the trial court appears to be cryptic, therefore, the

same is liable to be set-aside.

For the aforesaid reasons, the revision petition filed by

the plaintiff is partly allowed, the impugned judgment dated

30.5.2019 passed by the trial court is set-aside and the matter is

remanded to the trial court with a direction to decide the suit filed

(3 of 3) [CR-177/2019]

by the plaintiff afresh in accordance with law without being

influenced by its earlier judgment dated 30.5.2019.

Both the parties are directed to appear before the Trial

Court on 4.2.2022.

Record of the trial court be sent forthwith.

During the pendency of the suit, the defendants shall

maintain status-quo with regard to the shop in question.

(PRAKASH GUPTA),J

MR-65

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)