Khemchand S/O Ramnarayan Ram vs Chandanmal (Dead)
2022 Latest Caselaw 2546 Raj/2

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                  BENCH AT JAIPUR

               S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 229/2019

Khemchand      S/o    Ramnarayan            Ram,       R/o       Kalpana    Granite
Industrial Area, Sikar Tehsil And District Sikar (Raj)
                                                                     ----Appellant
                                    Versus
1.     Chandanmal (Dead)
       1/1. Anil Kumar S/o Chandan Mal, Present Resident Of
       Imphal (Manipur)
       1/2. Sunil Kumar S/o Chandan Mal, Present Resident Of
       Imphal (Manipur)
2.     Rajendra Kumar S/o Vilasray (Dead)
       2/1. Smt. Kiran Devi W/o Late Shri Rajendra Bhageriya,
       R/o Bhageriya Niwas, Ward No. 28, Station Road, Sikar
       (Rajasthan )
3.     Avinash S/o Late Rajendra Bhageriya, R/o Bhageriya
       Niwas, Station Road Sikar, Tehsil And District Sikar (Raj)
4.     Ashutosh S/o Late Rajendra Bhageriya,                       R/o Bhageriya
       Niwas, Station Road Sikar, Tehsil And District Sikar (Raj)
5.     Anurag S/o Late Rajendra Bhageriya, R/o Bhageriya
       Niwas, Station Road Sikar, Tehsil And District Sikar (Raj)
6.     Smt. Basanti Devi W/o Late Chandanmal Jain, R/o Sikar,
       Presently Residing At Imphal (Manipur)
7.     Vijay Kumar S/o Late Chandanmal Jain Patani, R/o Sikar
       Presently Residing At C/o Dhan Laxmi, Aaloo Gali, Imphal
       (Manipur)
8.     Manoj Kumar S/o Late Chandanmal Jain Patani, R/o Sikar
       Presently     Residing      At     Firm     Gangaram         Sukhdev,    69
       Dhangal Bazar, Imphal (Manipur)
9.     Vijay   Kumar       Adopted         S/o      Bhagwanlal,       R/o     Sikar
       Presentaly Residing At M/s Sukhdev Bhagwanlal, Aged
       About 74 Years, Dhangal Bazaar, Imphal (Manipur)
       (Plaintiff No. 8 And 9 Were The Performa Defendants,
       They Are Impleaed As Plaintiff On Later Stage)
                                                      ....Plaintiffs-respondents

10. Geeta Devi (Dead) 10/1. Radheyshyam S/o Late Gaurilal, R/o Near

(2 of 3) [CFA-229/2019]

Ghantaghar, Sikar Tehsil And District Sikar (Rajasthan) (Exempted Vide Order Sheet Date 11.10.2017) 10/2. Bhawani Shankar S/o Late Gauri Lal, R/o Near Ghantaghar, Sikar Presently At Mumbai (Maharashtra) 10/3. Smt. Radha Devi W/o Late Ramvallabh, R/o Near Ghantaghar, Sikar Tehsil And District Sikar (Rajasthan) 10/4. Shankarlal S/o Late Ramvallabh Tapadiya Grand- Son Of Late Gauri Lal, R/o Near Ghantaghar, Sikar Tehsil And District Sikar (Rajasthan) 10/5. Mahesh Kumar S/o Late Ramballabh Tapadiya Grand-Son Of Gaurilal, R/o Near Ghantaghar, Sikar Tehsil And District Sikar (Rajasthan)

11. Ramvallabh S/o Late Gauri Lal (Expired), (Name Deleted Vide Order Dated 15.01.1998)

12. Banshidhar S/o Late Dilsukh Ray (Dead) 12/1. Smt. Rukmani Devi W/o Late Banshidhar Mishra, R/o Khud, Tehsil Dantaramgarh District Sikar 12/2. Ramesh S/o Late Banshidhar Mishra, R/o Khud, Tehsil Dantaramgarh District Sikar 12/3. Basant S/o Late Banshidhar Mishra, R/o Khud, Tehsil Dantaramgarh District Sikar 12/4. Anjani S/o Late Banshidhar Mishra, R/o Khud, Tehsil Dantaramgarh District Sikar

13. Suryapal S/o Trilokchand, R/o Choudhary K.c. Auto Mobiles, Near Tapadiya Bagichi, Station Road, Sikar, Tehsil And District Sikar (Raj)

14. State Of Rajasthan Through District Collector,sikar, Sikar

15. Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sikar, Rajasthan

16. Tehsildar, Tehsil Sikar, Rajasthan

---Defendants-Respondents

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Hanuman Choudhary For Respondent(s) : Mr. Yogesh Kumar Sharma for Resp.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL

Order

(3 of 3) [CFA-229/2019]

24/03/2022

This first appeal has been filed by the appellant-defendant

assailing the judgment and decree dated 3 rd January, 2019,

whereby the sale deed dated 16.11.1996 was declared as null

and void qua plaintiffs and consequential decree for permanent

injunction was also passed.

During pendency of this first appeal, the appellant has

moved an application supported with affidavit No. 1/2022 alleging

inter alia that parties have entered into compromise. Although, no

written compromise has been placed on record before this court,

however, both advocates admit the factum of compromise.

In view of above, the appellant has prayed to withdraw the

appeal.

Permission, for withdrawal of appeal, is granted.

Accordingly, the application No.1/2022 is allowed and

consequentially, the first appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

Stay application and any other pending application(s), if

any, stand(s) disposed of.

(SUDESH BANSAL),J

TN/75

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)