Bhooli And Others vs Ram Singh And Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 5119 Raj/2

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                  BENCH AT JAIPUR

             S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 467/2013

1. Bhooli widow of Mulya aged 61 years
2. Gyani widow of Chhitar aged 63 years
3. Rukmani widow of Manya aged about 51 years
4. Bacchi widow of Ramkaran aged about 53 years
All, R/o Kailai, Tehsil Sikrai District Dausa.
                                                  ----Appellants/Defendants
                                   Versus
1. Ram Singh S/o Panchu aged about 51 years
2. Heeralal S/o Panchu aged about 58 years
3. Badri S/o Shyobux aged about 56 years
4. Hargyan S/o Shyobux aged about 56 years
5. Tofa widow of Late Shri Shyobux aged about 96 years,
All, R/o Village Kailai, Tehsil Sikrai, District Dausa
                                                   ----Respondents-Plaintiffs

6. State of Rajasthan through Chief Secretary, Secretariat, Jaipur

7. Sub District Collector Sikrai & Land Acquisition Officer, Sub- District Collector Office Sikrai, District Dausa.

8. Indian National Highway Authority through Chairman Sector G-5-6 Dwarka, New Delhi.

9. Union of India through Chief Secretary, Central Secretariat, New Delhi.

10. State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur Branch Sikandra through Manager SBBJ Sikandra Tehsil Sikrai (Dausa).

----Performa Respondents-Defendants

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Poonam Chand Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ram Ratan Gurjar Mr. Deepak Sharma

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL

Order

26/07/2022

1. Appellants-defendants have preferred this first appeal

against judgment and decree dated 13.09.2013 in Civil Suit

(2 of 2) [CFA-467/2013]

No.28/2007 passed by Additional District Judge Bandikui District

Dausa whereby and whereunder civil suit filed by respondents-

plaintiffs decreed for recovery of Rs.98,049/- with interest @6%

per annum.

2. It appears from the record that this Court vide order dated

06.12.2013 stayed the execution of money decree subject to

condition of deposition of entire decreetal amount with interest

before the trial court.

Learned counsel for appellants submits that the amount was

deposited.

3. Now counsel for both parties submits that parties have

amicably settled the dispute out of the court and in view of that,

appellants do not want to pursue this first appeal on merits and

seek permission to withdraw the same.

Learned counsel for respondents has no objection however,

he submits that amount deposited before the trial court be

disbursed in accordance with the impugned decree.

4. Heard counsel for both parties.

5. This first appeal is allowed to be dismissed as withdrawn

however, if any, decreetal amount is laying deposited before the

trial court, the same be disbursed to respondents-plaintiffs in

accordance with the decree.

6. All pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.

(SUDESH BANSAL),J

SAURABH/63

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)