Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Narpat Sing Parihar vs Kishna Ram @ Kishan Singh Sankhala ... on 12 December, 2023
Author: Rekha Borana
Bench: Rekha Borana
[2023:RJ-JD:43237]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Cross Objection (Civil) No. 30/2023
1. Narpat Singh Parihar S/o Birma Ram Parihar, Aged About
36 Years, R/o Near Tilwadiya Bera, 32 Prem Vihar, Near
Chopasani Road, Jodhpur.
2. Ram Dayal Parihar S/o Mangla Ram Parihar, Aged About
37 Years, R/o Tilwadiya Bera,prem Vihar,in Front Of
Chopasani School, Chopasani Road, Jodhpur , Rajasthan,
through Power Of Attorney Holder Narpat Singh Parihar
S/o Birma Ram Parihar,r/o Tilwadiya Bera, 32 Prem Vihar,
Near Chaupasni Road, Jodhpur (Rajasthan)
----Petitioners
Versus
1. Kishna Ram @ Kishan Singh Sankhala S/o Govind Ram
Sankhala, Aged About 52 Years, B/c Mali R/o Near
Tilwadiya Bera, Chopasani Road, Jodhpur , Rajasthan.
2. Dungar Ram @ Dungar Singh Sankhala S/o Govind Ram
Sankhala, Aged About 61 Years, R/o Near Tilwadiya Bera,
Chopasani Road, Jodhpur , Rajasthan.
3. Jodhpur Development Authority, Through Secretary
Jodhpur Development Authority, Jodhpur.
----Respondents
Connected With
S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1642/2022
1. Kishna Ram @ Kishan Singh Sankhala S/o Govind Ram
Sankhala, Aged About 52 Years, B/c Mali R/o Near
Tilwadiya Bera, Chopasani Road, Jodhpur , Rajasthan.
2. Dungar Ram @ Dungar Singh Sankhala S/o Govind Ram
Sankhala, Aged About 61 Years, B/c Mali R/o Near
Tilwadiya Bera, Chopasani Road, Jodhpur , Rajasthan.
----Appellants
Versus
1. Ram Dayal Parihar S/o Mangla Ram Parihar, R/o Tilwadiya
Bera,prem Vihar,in Front Of Chopasani School, Chopasani
Road, Jodhpur , Rajasthan.
2. Narpat Singh Parihar S/o Birma Ram Parihar, R/o Near
Tilwadiya Bera, 32 Prem Vihar, Near Chopasani Road,
Jodhpur.
(Downloaded on 13/12/2023 at 08:43:59 PM)
[2023:RJ-JD:43237] (2 of 4) [XOBJC-30/2023]
3. Jodhpur Development Authority, Through Secretary,
Jodhpur Development Authority, Jodhpur.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Deepak Nehra (for appellants in
CMA No.1642/22)
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Moti Singh (for Cross
objectors/respondents)
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA
Judgment
12/12/2023
1. The Civil Misc. Appeal (No.1642/2022) has been preferred
against the order dated 08.03.2022 passed by the Additional
District Judge No.07, Jodhpur Metropolitan in Civil Misc. Case
No.42/2022 (NCV No.73/2022) whereby an application preferred
under Order 39 Rule 1 & 2 read with Section 151 of Code of Civil
Procedure as preferred on behalf of the plaintiffs appellants had
been rejected. However, vide the said order, while rejecting the
application of the plaintiffs, the Court, on the undertaking given on
behalf of the counsel appearing for the defendants, directed that
land ad measuring 16 X 25 sq. ft. (44 sq. yards) out of Plot No.14
be reserved till the disposal of the suit.
2. Aggrieved against the said order, the appeal has been
preferred by the plaintiffs Kishna Ram and Dungar Ram in which
the cross objections have been preferred by defendants No.1 & 2;
Narpat Singh Parihar and Ram Dayal Parihar.
3. Vide interim order dated 22.09.2022, the respondents were
restrained from alienating the disputed property and both the
[2023:RJ-JD:43237] (3 of 4) [XOBJC-30/2023]
parties were directed to maintain status quo with regard to the
disputed property.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents cross objectors submits
that the complete suit of the plaintiffs was for 342 sq.yds. of land
only and it was an admitted case of the plaintiffs themselves that
302 sq.yds. of land (Plots No.5 & 6) had already been registered
in their names. Learned counsel submitted that the suit of the
plaintiffs pertained to remaining 40 sq.yds. of land only and
hence, the interim order qua the complete property deserves to be
modified.
5. However, with the consent of both the counsels, the appeal
as well as the cross objections have been heard finally.
6. A bare perusal of the plaint (copy of which, as supplied by
counsel for the respondents, has been taken on record) makes it
clear that it is an admitted case of the plaintiffs that qua 302 sq.
yds. of land, patta of two plots being Plots No.5 & 6 had been got
issued in their favour. The dispute pertains to 40 sq.yds. land only
as the case of the plaintiffs is that they are entitled for 342 sq.yds.
of land.
In view of the specific pleadings of the plaintiffs themselves,
this Court does not find any ground to interfere with the order
impugned dated 08.03.2022 which directs for reserving of 44 sq.
yds. land.
7. At this stage, learned counsel for the respondents made a
specific statement that 16 x 25 sq.ft. land of Plot No.14 is intact
and status qua regarding the said plot has been maintained by the
respondents till date.
[2023:RJ-JD:43237] (4 of 4) [XOBJC-30/2023]
8. In view of the specific statement made by learned counsel
for the respondents, the present appeal is disposed of while
affirming the impugned order dated 08.03.2022 with a
modification that the respondents shall maintain status quo
regarding ownership and possession of 16 X 25 sq. ft. (44 sq.
yds.) of land in northern side of Plot No.14 till the disposal of the
suit.
9. The cross objections also stand disposed of.
10. The stay petition and the pending applications, if any, also
stand disposed of.
(REKHA BORANA),J
67-/devanshi/Vij/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
