Babu Lal S/O Late Raghuveer Dayal ... vs Nandkishore S/O Late Raghuvar ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 7104 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

               S.B. Civil First Appeal No.376/2020

1.     Babu Lal S/o Late Raghuveer Dayal Sharma,
2.     Ram Krishan S/o Late Raghuvar Dayal Sharma,
       Both R/o Ward No. 11, Patwariyo Ka Mohalla, (Gopal
       Pada), Chomu District Jaipur
                                                                  ----Appellants
                                      Versus
Nandkishore S/o Late Raghuvar Dayal Sharma, R/o Ward No. 11,
Patwariyo Ka Mohalla, (Gapal Pada), Chomu Tehsil Chomu
District Jaipur
                                                                 ----Respondent

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Amit Jindal with Ms. Dipti Agarwal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mahesh Gupta

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL

Order

09/11/2022

Instant first appeal has been filed by appellants-defendants

assailing the judgment and preliminary decree for partition dated

21.12.2019 passed in Civil Suit No.31/2015 by the Court of

Additional District Judge No.20, Jaipur Metropolitan Head quarter

at Chomu whereby and whereunder suit property (house) has

been declared to be divided in equal 1/3-1/3 share among three

brothers.

Counsel appearing on behalf of appellants-defendants

submits that appellant-defendant-Babu Lal has entered into

compromise and does not want to press his appeal. An application

(I.A. No.1/2022) has also been filed to this effect which is

supported with affidavit of Babu Lal. He is present in person and

(2 of 2) [CFA-376/2020]

identified by counsel for appellant. The prayer of appellants is

accepted and the first appeal is dismissed as withdrawn in respect

of appellant-defendant-Babu Lal.

Accordingly, the application (I.A. No.1/2022) stands disposed

of.

As far as appellant-defendant-Ram Krishan is concerned, he

wants to challenge the impugned judgment though he has also

been allocated 1/3rd share in the house property. However, this

appeal shall remain continue in respect of appellant-defendant-

Ram Krishan.

Heard counsel for both parties on stay application.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case,

this Court is not inclined to stay the proceedings of preparation of

the final decree which are proceedings in continuation of the

preliminary decree for partition as has been held by Hon'ble

Supreme Court in case of Kattukandi Edathil Krishnan vs.

Kattukandi Edathil Valsan [AIR 2022 SC 2841].

However, stay application is disposed of with observation

that the final decree shall remain outcome to the present first

appeal and appellant shall not be dispossessed from the portion he

is in possession during the course of this first appeal.

With aforesaid, stay application stands disposed of.

Since this Court has permitted the trial court to proceed for

the proceedings for preparation of the final decree, therefore,

record be sent back to the trial court along with copy of this order

to proceed with the proceedings of final decree.

(SUDESH BANSAL),J

SAURABH/103

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)