Raj Kumar S/O Ram Chandra vs Balkrishna S/O Jaggannath
2022 Latest Caselaw 4857 Raj/2

        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                    BENCH AT JAIPUR

              S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 778/2022

Raj Kumar S/o Ram Chandra, Aged About 67 Years, R/o
Aalanpur Presently At Ran Thambor Circle, Station Road, Sawai
Madhopur, Tehsil And District Sawai Madhopur (Raj.)
                                                                          ----Appellant
                                       Versus
1.          Balkrishna S/o Jaggannath, Aged About 55 Years, R/o
            Kumawat Maholla, City Sawai Madhopur, District And
            Tehsil Sawai Madhopur
2.          Balmukund S/o Jaggannath, Aged About 40 Years, R/o
            Kumawat Maholla, City Sawai Madhopur, District Ans
            Tehsil Sawai Madhopur.
3.          State Of Rajasthan Through Tehsildar (Land Holder),
            Sawai Madhopur.
                                                   ----Respondents/Defendants

For Appellant(s) : Mr. B.B. Ojha, Advocate

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH GUPTA

Judgment

15/07/2022

This Civil Misc. Appeal has been filed by the appellant-

plaintiff (for short, 'the plaintiff') against the order dated

19.2.2022 passed by District Judge, Sawai Madhopur, whereby the

temporary injunction application filed by the plaintiff has been

dismissed.

Learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that the trial

court did not take into consideration the documents available on

record. He further submits that during the pendency of the suit,

the respondents-defendants (for short, 'the defendants') may

(2 of 2) [CMA-778/2022]

alienate the property, therefore, T.I. order with regard to

alienation of the suit property is required to be passed.

Heard. Considered.

From a perusal of the material on record, it is noticed

that the plaintiff filed the suit for recovery of money and for

possession. It is revealed that neither in the suit nor in the

application for temporary injunction, relief with regard to

alienation of the suit property was prayed for.

I am of the considered opinion that the relief which was

not prayed for, cannot be granted.

For the aforesaid reason, I find no force in this appeal

and the same being bereft of any merit, is liable to be dismissed,

which stands dismissed accordingly.

(PRAKASH GUPTA),J

DK/2

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)