Kamal Kumar S/O Shri Bhanwarlal ... vs Bhanwarlal Yadav S/O Shri ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 7112 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

              S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 136/2021

Kamal Kumar S/o Shri Bhanwarlal Jakhad
                                                     ----Appellant-Plaintiff
                                   Versus
Bhanwarlal Yadav S/o Shri Mangilal & ors.
                                            ----Respondent-Defendants

For Appellant(s)         :     Mr. Rahul Agarwal
For Respondent(s)        :     Mr. Ashok Sharma



           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL

                                    Order

09/11/2022

1. The instant second appeal under Section 100 CPC has been

preferred by appellant-plaintiff assailing the judgment and decree

dated 6.3.2021 passed in Regular First Appeal No. 12/2010

(38/2010) (CIS No.162/2014) by the Additional District Judge

No.1, Sikar whereby and whereunder dismissing the appeal

affirmed the judgment and decree dated 16.04.2010 passed in

Civil Suit No.23/2008 by the Additional Civil Judge (Jr. D.) No.2,

Sikar whereunder the plaintiff's suit for permanent injunction has

been dismissed.

2. Learned counsel for appellant submits that the suit property

was purchased by him through registered sale deed dated

10.01.2007 from the Khatedar and owner of the land Prakash

(respondent-defendant No.2. Since defendants sought to

dispossess the plaintiff, therefore the suit for permanent injunction

was instituted on 12.02.2007.

3. In the suit, defendant No.1 alleged his status as power of

attorney holder of defendant No.2-Prakash. After dismissal of suit

(2 of 3) [CSA-136/2021]

vide judgment dated 16.04.2010, plaintiff preferred the first

appeal. During pendency of the first appeal, defendant No.1

executed three sale deeds dated 22.03.2011. The prospective

purchasers under three sale deeds have not come before the court

and the application filed by the respondent-defendant No.1 under

Order 41 Rule 27 CPC to place copies of sale deeds on record, was

dismissed by the first appellate court and thereafter the first

appeal has also been dismissed.

4. Learned counsel for appellant submits that once the

registered Khatedar and owner has sold the suit property to the

plaintiff through registered sale deed dated 10.01.2007, a power

of attorney holder of seller has no right to sell the property again

through sale deeds which were executed during the course of

present lis. Counsel appearing on behalf of defendant No.1

contended that it is true that he is the power of attorney holder of

defendant No.2, however, an agreement had already been

executed in the year 1998 in favour of the prospective purchaser

and after dismissal of the suit, sale deeds dated 22.03.2011 have

been executed in pursuance thereof.

5. Heard learned counsel for both parties, the matter requires

admission and consideration on the following substantial question

of law:-

"Whether the property rights of plaintiff on the suit property have become absolutes by virtue of sale deed dated 10.01.2007, and when the sale deed of plaintiff was not challenged, two courts below have committed illegality in dismissing the plaintiff's suit for permanent injunction?"

6. The second appeal is admitted.

                                                                (3 of 3)                                  [CSA-136/2021]



                                   7.      Issue notice.

Respondents No.1 and 3 have appeared, hence notice be

issued to only legal representatives of respondent No.2.

8. Record has already been received.

9. Heard on the stay application.

10. During pendency of the second appeal, parties shall maintain

status quo in respect of alienation, construction and possession of

the suit property, as it exists today.

11. Stay application stands disposed of.

List alongwith S.B. Civil Second Appeal No.137/2021.

(SUDESH BANSAL),J

TN/97

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)