Rajasthan High Court
Rajendra Son Of Shri Tek Chand vs Smt. Suman Devi Wife Of Shri ... on 11 May, 2022
Bench: Mahendar Kumar Goyal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6941/2022
1. Rajendra Son Of Shri Tek Chand, Aged About 61 Years,
Resident Of Village Revana, Tehsil Neemrana, District
Alwar (Raj.)
2. Raja Ram Son Of Shri Tek Chand, Aged About 47 Years,
Resident Of Village Revana, Tehsil Neemrana, District
Alwar (Raj.)
----Petitioners-Plaintiffs
Versus
1. Smt. Suman Devi Wife Of Shri Dharmendra, Aged About
52 Years, Resident Of Village Revana, Tehsil Neemrana,
District Alwar (Raj.)
2. Dharmendra Son Of Shri Tek Chand, Aged About 55
Years, Resident Of Village Revana, Tehsil Neemrana,
District Alwar (Raj.)
3. Tek Chand Son Of Shri Jhamman, Aged About 85 Years,
Resident Of Village Revana, Tehsil Neemrana, District
Alwar (Raj.)
4. Rakesh Son Of Tek Chand, Aged About 45 Years, Resident
Of Village Revana, Tehsil Neemrana, District Alwar (Raj.)
5. Gajraj Son Of Shri Tek Chand, Aged About 59 Years,
Resident Of Village Revana, Tehsil Neemrana, District
Alwar (Raj.)
6. Suman Devi Wife Of Shri Rajveer, Aged About 47 Years,
Resident Of Village Revana, Tehsil Neemrana, District
Alwar (Raj.)
7. Pankaj Son Of Shri Rajveer, Aged About 18 Years,
Resident Of Village Revana, Tehsil Neemrana, District
Alwar (Raj.)
8. Sub Registrar, Neemrana, Tehsil Neemrana, District Alwar.
9. Tehsildar, Neemrana, District Alwar (Raj.)
----Respondents-Defendants
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Anil Yadav for
Mr. Ashivn Garg
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
Order
11/05/2022
(2 of 3) [CW-6941/2022]
The unsuccessful plaintiffs have filed this writ petition under
Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated
30.03.2022 passed by the learned Additional District Judge No.2,
Behror, District Alwar whereby, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal
No.50/14/2021 (CIS No.23/2021) preferred against the order
dated 27.10.2021 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge,
Behror in Civil Miscellaneous Case No.20/2020 partly allowing the
application filed by them under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 read with
Section 151 CPC, has been dismissed.
The facts in brief are that the petitioners-plaintiffs filed a suit
for mandatory and permanent injunction assailing the legality and
validity of the sale deed dated 08.07.2020 executed by the
respondent No.3, Tek Chand, their father, in favour of the
respondent No.1. The temporary injunction application filed by the
petitioners along with the suit was partly allowed by the learned
trial Court vide its order dated 27.10.2021 whereby, the parties
were directed to maintain status quo with regard to subject
property qua its record. The civil miscellaneous appeal preferred
thereagainst has been dismissed by the learned Appellate Court
vide its judgment dated 30.03.2022.
Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the
respondent No.3 executed the sale deed during the period when
an interim order dated 04.07.2020 passed by the learned Civil
Judge, Behror in Civil Miscellaneous Case No.39/2020 as also an
order dated 24.06.2020 passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate,
Neemrana, District Alwar (for brevity "the SDM") under Section
145 CrPC, were operative. He, therefore, prayed that the writ
petition be allowed and the order impugned be quashed and set
aside.
(3 of 3) [CW-6941/2022]
Heard. Considered.
There is concurrent findings of fact by the Courts that the
respondent No.3/defendant No.3 has sold the subject land, under
his khatedari, in favour of respondent No.1 through registered sale
deed dated 08.07.2020. It has also come on record that the
respondents are in possession of the subject land and have almost
completed the construction thereupon.
In view thereof, in the considered opinion of this Court, the
learned trial Court did not err in directing the parties to maintain
status quo qua the record of the subject property only and not qua
its physical status. Learned counsel for the petitioner could not
satisfy this Court that the order impugned suffers from any patent
jurisdictional error or perversity warranting interference of this
Court under its supervisory jurisdiction.
Contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners qua
validity of the sale deed in the light of the order dated 04.07.2020
passed by the learned Civil Judge, Behror in Civil Miscellaneous
Case No.39/2020 and the order dated 24.06.2020 passed by the
SDM under Section 145 CrPC, does not merit acceptance at this
stage. Validity of the sale deed executed by the respondent No.3
in favour of the respondent No.1 is subject-matter of trial and the
learned trial Court has already directed the parties to maintain
status quo of the subject land qua its record which has been
affirmed by the learned Appellate Court.
The upshot of the aforesaid discussion is that the writ
petition is devoid of merit and is dismissed accordingly.
(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J
Manish/94
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
