Rajasthan High Court
Kamlesh Kanwar And Others vs Murlidhar And Others on 7 March, 2022
Bench: Sudesh Bansal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 359/2012
1. Kamlesh Kanwar D/o Late Shri Hanuman Singh., R/o
Srimadhopur District Sikar Rajasthan.
2. Monu S/o Vimlesh Kanwar., R/o Srimadhopur District
Sikar Rajasthan.
3. Priti D/o Vimlesh Kanwar., R/o Srimadhopur District Sikar
Rajasthan.
4. Santosh Kanwar D/o Late Shri Hanuman Singh., R/o
Srimadhopur District Sikar Rajasthan.
5. Kanta Kanwar D/o Late Shri Hanuman Singh., R/o
Srimadhopur District Sikar Rajasthan.
6. Manju Kanwar D/o Late Shri Hanuman Singh, R/o
Srimadhopur District Sikar Rajasthan.
7. Dipendra Singh S/o Late Shri Hanuman Singh, R/o
Srimadhopur District Sikar Rajasthan.
----Appellants
Versus
1. Murlidhar S/o Phool Chand, R/o Srimadhopur Presently
R/o Rambhawan House Of Rambabu Sharma Chorsaiya
Basroad, Vaishali Nagar, Ajmer.
2. Satya Narayan S/o Phool Chand., R/o Srimadhopur
Presently R/o Rambhawan House Of Rambabu Sharma
Chorsaiya Basroad, Vaishali Nagar, Ajmer.
3. Prem Narayan S/o Phool Chand., R/o Srimadhopur
Presently R/o Rambhawan House Of Rambabu Sharma
Chorsaiya Basroad, Vaishali Nagar, Ajmer.
4. Man Mohan S/o Phool Chand., R/o Srimadhopur Presently
R/o Rambhawan House Of Rambabu Sharma Chorsaiya
Basroad, Vaishali Nagar, Ajmer.
5. Harsahay S/o Bhuramal, R/o Ward No.7 Srimadhopur,
Presently Resident Of House No. 6-Ka-27, Ram Singh Ki
Dhani, Hiranmagri, Udaipur Rajasthan.
6. Hari Singh S/o Suraj R/o Dhani Malrak Wali, Tan Jetusar,
Tehsil Srimadhopur. District Srim
7. Jaybhagwan Singh S/o Shri Narayan Mal, R/o Dhani Mala
Ki Wali, Tan Jaitsar, Tehsil Srimadhopur, District Sawai
(Downloaded on 14/03/2022 at 08:55:47 PM)
(2 of 3) [CSA-359/2012]
Madhopur Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Rahul Sharma
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sudeep Mathur
Mr. Babu Lal
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL
Order
07/03/2022
1. Appellants-plaintiffs have preferred this second appeal
assailing the judgment and decree dated 28.03.2008 passed by
Civil Judge (Senior Division) Srimadhopur, District Sikar in Civil
Suit No.28/1999 (34/1990) whereby and whereunder their civil
suit for specific performance was dismissed and which has been
affirmed by first appellate court vide judgment dated 02.05.2012.
2. From the record, it appears that civil suit for specific
performance was filed based on an agreement dated 19.11.1987
in relation to two rooms with chowk situated at Srimadhopur
wherein plaintiffs were tenant. The respondent-defendant denied
the agreement. The trial court recorded evidence of both parties
and observed that the agreement in question is not proved. The
plaintiffs' evidence was not found sufficient to prove the execution
of agreement. The first appellate court has also affirmed such
findings.
3. Thus, both courts below have recorded fact findings that the
execution of agreement itself is not proved, such findings do not
give rise to any substantial question of law.
4. Counsel for respondents has also submitted that appellants
were tenants and against whom the eviction proceedings were
(3 of 3) [CSA-359/2012]
initiated which have attained finality and in the execution
proceedings, the actual possession has been taken.
5. After having considered the rival submissions of counsel for
both parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that fact
findings recorded by two courts below do not suffer from any
infirmity or perversity and no substantial question of law is
involved in the present appeal.
6. Accordingly, the second appeal is bereft of merits and
deserves to be dismissed. Hence, the second appeal is hereby
dismissed. No order as to costs.
7. All pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.
(SUDESH BANSAL),J
SAURABH/1
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
