Rajasthan High Court
Bheru Son Of Omkar vs Assistant Engineer, J V V N L on 19 May, 2022
Bench: Sudesh Bansal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 217/2021
Bheru Son Of Omkar, resident of Mohalla Bachdi, Dhani Faujawali
Kasba, kotputli, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.
----Appellant-plaintiff
Versus
1. Assistant Engineer, Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited,
Kotputli, District Jaipur.
2. Executive Engineer, Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited,
Shahpura, District Jaipur.
3. Superintending Engineer, Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited,
Jaipur, Rajasthan.
4. Jagdish son of Omkar, resident of Dhani Faujawali Kasba,
kotputli, District Jaipur, Rajasthan.
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Jitender Mituka
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL
Order
19/05/2022
1. The instant second appeal has been filed by appellant-
plaintiff, feeling aggrieved by dismissal of his civil suit for
permanent injunction to restrain the respondents for not issuing
any electric connection to private respondent No.4.
2. It has been alleged that private respondent No.4 had applied
for electric connection over the land of Khasra No.505 at Kothputli,
just in order to create an additional evidence for his possession,
although, he already has an electric connection for his use.
3. Counsel for appellant submits that prior to filing of present
suit, a dispute about partition, declaration of Khatedari rights and
injunction is already pending between parties and the revenue suit
was filed, which has been decided and now the litigation is
pending before the High Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition
No.15808/2013. In the writ petition, the order of status quo was
(2 of 3) [CSA-217/2021]
passed dated 17.09.2013, directing the parties to maintain status
quo in relation to subject land in question, is in operation.
However, respondent No.4 has got issued a new electric
connection in utter violation to the stay order dated 17.09.2013.
4. Counsel for appellant submits that appellant has already
moved a contempt petition for violation of the stay order dated
17.09.2013 which is pending for adjudication. However, the
respondent No.4 may not be allowed to use this electric
connection as a piece of additional evidence to show his
possession over the land of Khasra No.505, Kothputli.
5. Heard counsel for appellant, peruse the impugned judgments
and record made available before this Court.
6. It appears that the subject land is part of litigation of the
partition and declaration of Khatedari rights initiated by way of
filing the revenue suit, which is subject matter of the Civil Writ
Petition No.15808/2013 pending before the High Court. As per
Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, any action during
pendency of lis, does not affect the rights of either of the parties
to be adjudicated on merits. Thus, even if, the electric connection
has been issued in favour of respondent No.4, same would not
affect the adjudication of rights of parties on merits which were
crystallized on the date of filing of suit.
7. Thus, it is hereby observed that issuance of electric
connection in favour of respondent No.4 will not affect the rights
of either of parties on merits to be adjudicated in the pending Civil
Writ Petition No.15808/2013.
8. With aforesaid observations, this second appeal is disposed
of without any interference in the impugned judgment and decree.
(3 of 3) [CSA-217/2021]
9. However, it is made clear that the order passed in this
second appeal would not affect the proceedings of contempt
petition.
(SUDESH BANSAL),J
NITIN /8
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
