Rajasthan High Court
Om Prakash vs Late Hazari Lal And Ors on 16 September, 2022
Bench: Sudesh Bansal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Second Appeal No.306/2006
Om Prakash S/o Raghunath Prasad, R/o Chhabra, Distt. Baran
(Raj).
----Appellant
Versus
1. Late Hazari Lal S/o Bihari Lal, R/o Chhabra, Distt. Baran
(Since Deceased) Through His Legal Representatives:
1/1. Ghishi Bai W/o Late Haari Lal
1/2. Mangi Lal S/o Hazari Lal (deceased)
1/2/1 Jitu S/o Mangi Lal, age 30 years
1/2/2 Santosh D/o Mangi Lal, age 40 years
1/2/3 Sunia widow of Satya Narayan, age 35 years
1/2/4 Rahul S/o Satya Narayan, age 15 years
1/2/5 Kallu S/o Satya Narayan, age 13 years
1/2/6 Anjali D/o Satya Narayan, age 11 years
1/2/7 Sonu D/o Satya Narayan, age 9 years
1/2/4 to 1/2/7 is minor through their natural guardian
Sunia widow of Satya Narayan
All are resident of Chhabra District Baran (Raj.)
1/3. Kajod S/o Hazari Lal (Deceased)
1/3/1. Gopali widow of Kajod
1/3/2. Mithun Kumar S/o Kajod
1/3/3. Rajendra Kumar S/o Kajod
1/3/4. Deenu S/o Kajod
1/3/5. Jitendra Kumar S/o Kajod
1/3/6. Maya D/o Kajod, minor
All minors Through Their Mother Gopali W/o Kajod,
1/4. Nanda S/o Shri Hazari Lal
1/5. Bhag Chand S/o Hazari Lal,
1/6. Dhakha Bai W/o Hazari Lal,
All R/o Chhabra, Distt. Baran
1/7. Gulab Bai D/o Hazari Lal (deceased)
1/7/1. Ishwar D son of Gulab Bai wife of Mangi Lal
1/7/2. Ramswarup son of Gulab Bai wife of Mangi Lal
Both are major, resident of Atru District Baran (Raj.)
(Downloaded on 23/09/2022 at 12:48:15 AM)
(2 of 4) [CSA-306/2006]
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. J.K. Singhi, Sr. Advocate assisted
by Mr. Tarun Kumar
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rinesh Kumar Gupta with
Mr. Anoop Meena & Mr.Kapil Bhardwaj
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL
Order
16/09/2022
1. By way of this second appeal, appellant-plaintiff has assailed
the judgment and decree dated 22.04.2006 passed in Civil First
Appeal No.2/2002 by the Court of Additional District Judge,
Chhabra, District Baran whereby the judgment and decree dated
04.04.2000 passed in Civil Suit No.28/1984 by the Court of Civil
Judge (Sr. Division), Chhabra, District Baran decreeing the
plaintiff's suit to cancel the sale deed dated 22.04.1963, has been
set aside.
2. Thus, by way of this second appeal, appellant-plaintiff has
pressed his prayer in the civil suit to cancel the sale deed dated
22.04.1963.
3. During the course of appeal, appellant has moved an
application (I.A. No.5/2022) under Order 23 Rule 1 read with
Section 107 CPC dated 02.09.2022 stating inter alia that by way
of compromise dated 23.10.2021 arrived at between the parties,
respondents have accepted appellant-plaintiff as sole khatedar-
tenant and owner of lands in question of Khata No.46, Khasra
No.235 measuring 8 bigha 8 biswa and Khasra No.236 measuring
1 bigha 14 biswa situate at Tehsil Chhabra District Baran and
virtually the impugned sale deed in favour of respondents has
been rendered as ineffective and void.
(3 of 4) [CSA-306/2006]
4. Learned counsel for appellant submits that in view of such
compromise dated 23.10.2021, this second appeal be disposed of
accordingly.
The copy of compromise dated 23.10.2021 has been
annexed with the application as Annexure-4.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents does not
oppose the application and does not dispute the factum of
compromise and is agreeable to dispose of the second appeal in
terms of compromise as agreed between the parties on
23.10.2021.
6. However, four other applications have been filed purportedly
under Order 22 Rule 4 CPC, Order 22 Rule 9 CPC and Section 5 of
the Limitation Act stating that during course of appeal, respondent
1/2 Mangi Lal and respondent 1/7 Gulab Bai have passed away
and their legal representatives as mentioned in applications
allowed to be substituted and taken on record by condoning the
delay and setting aside the abatement qua deceased respondents.
7. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents as well
as legal representatives of deceased respondent Nos.1/2 and 1/7
does not oppose applications. Therefore, the delay in filing
applications is condoned, abatement qua deceased is set aside
and the legal representatives of deceased respondent Nos.1/2 and
1/7 are allowed to be substituted in their place.
8. The amended cause title, enclosed with application, is taken
on record.
9. All applications (I.A. Nos.1/2022, 2/2022, 3/2022 & 4/2022)
stand disposed of.
10. Without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, with
consent of counsel for both parties, the application (I.A.
(4 of 4) [CSA-306/2006]
No.5/2022) filed under Order 22 Rule 1 CPC dated 02.09.2022 is
allowed.
11. As a consequence, this second appeal stands disposed of in
terms of the compromise arrived at between parties as mentioned
hereinabove.
12. Record be sent back.
(SUDESH BANSAL),J
SAURABH/88
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
