Smt Maya Devi vs State And Ors
2022 Latest Caselaw 7060 Raj/2

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                  BENCH AT JAIPUR

               S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 811/2005

1. Smt Maya Devi W/o Surendra Singh Chauhan, resident of
Kolila, Tehsil, Behrod, Dist. Alwar through her General Power of
Attorney Sh. Laxman Singh S/o Sh. Dan Singh aged 48 years,
resident of Plot No.15, opposite Rajdhani Tourist Motel, N.H. 8,
Kotputli, Dist. Jaipur.
2. Smt. Saroj Kanwar W/o Shri Laxman Singh, aged 58 years,
resident of village Amaitan, opposite RTM Hotel, Tehsil Kotputli,
Dist. Jaipur
                                                 ----Appellant-defendant
                                   Versus
1. The State of Rajasthan through Secretary Mines Department,
Secretariat, Jaipur.
2. Mining Engineering, Jaipur Khanij Bhawan, Tilak Marg, 'C'
Scheme, Jaipur.
                                          ----Respondents-defendants

3. Kailash Chand Mangla S/o Late Shri Prabhu Dayal, resident of B-5, Raja Park, Jaipur (expired on 28.10.2005) now represented through his legal representatives:-

3/1. Smt. Shakuntla Widow of Kailash Chand Mangal (since deceased) 3/2. Sanjay S/o Kailash Chand Mangal 3/3. Ajay S/o Kailash Chand Mangal since deceased now being represented through following legal heirs:- 3/3/1 Smt. Suman Agarwal Wife of late Shri Ajay Agarwal 3/3/2 Tushar Agarwal son late Shri Ajay Agarwal 3/3/3 Tanmay Agarwal son of late Shri Ajay Agarwal All residents B-5 Goving Marg, Raja Park, Jaipur 3/4 Vijay S/o Kailash Chand Mangal 3/5 Akshaya S/o Kailash Chand Mangal 3/6 Sarita D/o Kailash Chand Mangal All residents of B-5, Govind Marg, Raja Park, Jaipur

------ Plaintiffs-respondents Connected With S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 84/2004 Kailash Chand Mangla (Since deceased) through his legal heirs- 1/1 Smt. Shakuntla Mangal aged 62 years W/o Late Shri Kailash Chand Mangla, resident of B-5, Raja Park, Jaipur

(2 of 5) [CFA-811/2005]

1/2 Sanjay Mangal aged 42 years S/o Late Shri Kailash Chand Mangla resident of 87, Mauji Colony, Malviya Nagar, Jaipur 1/3 Ajay Mangal (since deceased) 1/3/1 Suman Mangal aged 38 years wife of Late Shri Ajay Mangal 1/3/2 Tusar Mangal son of Late Shri Ajay Mangal 1/3/3 Tanmay Mangal son of Late Shri Ajay Mangal (No.1/3/2 and 1/3/3 both minors through their mother and natural guardian smt. Suman Mangal) All residents of B-5, Raja Park, Jaipur 1/4 Vijay Mangal aged 37 years S/o Late Shri Kailash Chand Mangal, residents of B-5, Raja Park, Jaipur 1/5 Sarita Rana aged 32 years w/o Shri Pushpendra Rana d/o Late Shri Kailash Chand Mangla, resident of 4-ka-40, Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur 1/6 Akshay Mangal aged 32 years s/o Late Shri Kailash Chand Mangla, resident B-5, Raja Park, Jaipur

----Appellants Versus

1. Laxman Singh S/o Dan Singh Rajput, resident of Dhanki Khatikan, Tan Karoli, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur (Raj)

2. Ratipal Singh S/o Dan Singh Rajput, resident of Dhanki Khatikan, Tan Karoli, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur (Raj)

3. Raghuvir Singh S/o Dan Singh Rajput, resident of Dhanki Khatikan, Tan Karoli, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur (Raj)

4. Sheopal Singh S/o Gangu Singh, resident of Dhani Hapoda, Tan Panchpahari, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur (Rajasthan)

5. Moti Singh S/o Gangu Singh, resident of Dhani Hapoda, Tan Panchpahari, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur (Rajasthan)

6. Jassu Singh S/o Gangu Singh, resident of Dhani Hapoda, Tan Panchpahari, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur (Rajasthan)

7. Sawai Singh S/o Chandra Singh Rajput, residents of Hapoda, Tan Panch Pahadi, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur

8. Ram Singh S/o Chandra Singh Rajput, residents of Hapoda, Tan Panch Pahadi, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur

9. Raju Singh S/o Chandra Singh Rajput, residents of Hapoda, Tan Panch Pahadi, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur

10. Nand Singh S/o Chandra Singh Rajput, residents of Hapoda, Tan Panch Pahadi, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur

11. Babu Singh adopted son of Prabhu Singh, residents of Hapoda, Tan Panch Pahadi, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur

12. Ratan Singh S/o Umrao Singh Rajput, residents of Hapoda, Tan Panch Pahadi, Tehsil Kotputli, District Jaipur

13. Maya Devi widow of Surendra Singh, resident of Village Kolila

(3 of 5) [CFA-811/2005]

Tehsil Behrod, District Alwar (Rajasthan)

14. Tehsildar (Land Holder) Kotputli

----Respondents-defendants S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 353/2006

1. State of Rajasthan through Secretary Department of Mines, Government Secretariat, Bhagwan Das Road, Jaipur

2. Mining Engineer, Mines and Geology, Khanij Bhawan, Tilak Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur

----Appellants-defendants Versus

1. Kailash Chand Mangla (since deceased) through his legal heirs 1/1. Shakuntla widow of Kailash Chand Mangla 1/2 Sanjay S/o Kailash Chand Mangla 1/3 Ajay S/o Kailash Chand Mangla 1/4 Vijay s/o Kailash Chand Mangla 1/5 Akshay s/o Kailash Chand Mangla 1/6 Sarita D/o Kailash Chand Mangla All residents of B-5, Govind Marg, Raja Park, Jaipur

----Respondents-plaintiffs

2. Smt. Maya Devi W/o Shri Surendra Singh Chauhan, resident of Kolila Tehsil Behror, District Alwar (Rajasthan)

-----Respondent-defendant

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Jitendra Mishra Mr. Manish Sharma Mr. Zakir Hussain For Respondent(s) : Mr. A.K. Sharma Sr. Adv. with Mr. T.P. Singh Shekhawat

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL

Order

07/11/2022

In S.B. Civil First Appeals No.811/2005 and 353/2006:

1. These first appeals have arisen against the judgment and

decree dated 21.10.2005 passed in civil suit for permanent

injunction filed by respondent-plaintiff Kailash Chand bearing

(4 of 5) [CFA-811/2005]

No.79/2004 by Additional District Judge (Fast Track) No.5, Jaipur

City, Jaipur. Respondent-plaintiff, on the basis of mining lease

situated at Khasra No.668, 669, 672 and 669/1112 village Panch

Pahadi, Tehsil Paota, Jaipur, instituted the civil suit for permanent

injunction and appellant-defendant Maya Devi, claimed herself to

be Khatedar of lands in question and opposed the civil suit. Hence,

appellant-defendant Maya Devi has challenged the judgment and

decree dated 21.10.2005 by way of filing Civil First Appeal

No.811/2005.

2. Appellant-defendant-State of Rajasthan has also challenged

the decree for permanent injunction dated 21.10.2005 passed in

favour of respondent-plaintiff by way of filing Civil First Appeal

No.353/2006.

3. During pendency of appeal, an application (No.1/2022) has

been filed in First Appeal No.811/2005 stating that mining lease in

question has been revoked by the Mining Department by its order

dated 20.1.2020 and therefore, the suit for permanent injunction

filed by respondent-plaintiff itself has become infructuous and

accordingly the impugned judgment and decree dated 21.10.2005

has become redundant. Therefore, appeal be disposed of

accordingly. A copy of order dated 20.1.2020 has been placed on

record as Annexure-1.

4. Counsel for appellant-State has also made similar prayer in

First Appeal No.353/2006.

5. Counsel appearing for respondents-plaintiffs does not dispute

that the mining lease has been revoked vide order dated

20.1.2020 by the Mining Department, however, he submits that as

far as first appeal No.811/2005 is concerned, he has no objection

to dispose of the appeal finally but as far as first appeal

(5 of 5) [CFA-811/2005]

No.353/2006 filed by State is concerned, same may be dispose of

subject to challenge and final outcome of the order dated

20.1.2020.

6. Having considered contentions of learned counsel for both

parties, taking into consideration, the order dated 20.1.2020

whereby and whereunder the mining lease in respect of lands in

question has been revoked, it is hereby observed that the

impugned judgment and decree dated 21.10.2005 has become

redundant, subject to challenge and outcome thereof to the

revocation order of mining lease, both first appeals No.811/2005

and 353/2006 stands disposed of as having become infructuous.

In S.B. Civil First Appeal No.84/2004:

1. This first appeal has been preferred by appellant-plaintiff

Kailash Chand, feeling aggrieved by dismissal of his civil suit

No.18/1996 vide judgment dated 29.10.2003. This civil suit was

also filed on the basis of mining lease situated at land of Khasra

No.668, 669, 672 and 669/1112 village Panch Pahadi, Tehsil

Paota, Jaipur, which undisputedly has been revoked by the Mining

Department vide order dated 20.1.2020, therefore, counsel for

appellants-plaintiffs does not press this first appeal, in view of

revocation of mining lease.

2. Accordingly, the first appeal is dismissed as not press.

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

(SUDESH BANSAL),J

NITIN /49-51

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)