Smt. Dakhu Devi vs Lrs Of Late Rewashankar ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 8409 Raj

[2023:RJ-JD:34324]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 510/2006

Smt. Dakhu Devi W/o Late Pukhraj, Aged About 75 Years, B/c Mewara Kalal, R/o Maudon Ka Chauk, Loharo Ki Masjid, Hathram Ka Oda, Jodhpur.

----Appellant Versus

1. Lrs Of Late Rewashankar, Adoption S/o Tulsiram (S/o Lalchand) B/c Mewara Kalal, R/o Subhash Chauk, Barmer 1/1. Dhanraj S/o Lt. Rewashankar, B/c Mewara Kalar R/o House No. 30, Masuriya Balaji, Near New Kohinoor Cinema, Back Side Of Andra Bank, Jodhpur. 1/2. Lrs Of Rajendra Prasad S/o Rewashankar, S/o Rewashankar 1/2/1. Shakuntala Devi W/o Late Rajendra Prasad, B/c Mewara Kalal Resident Of Sugan Sadan, Inside Sojti Gate, Near Bata Shop, Jodhpur.

1/2/2. Dhiraj S/o Late Rajendra Prasad, B/c Mewara Kalal Resident Of Sugan Sadan, Inside Sojti Gate, Near Bata Shop, Jodhpur.

1/2/3. Vinita W/o Puneet Mewara, B/c Mewara Kalal Resident Of Sugan Sadan, Inside Sojti Gate, Near Bata Shop, Jodhpur. 1/3. Shivnarayan S/o Lt. Rewashankar, R/o House No. 30, Masuriya Balaji, Near New Kohinoor Cinema, Back Side Of Andra Bank, Jodhpur.

1/4. Madanlal S/o Lt. Rewashankar, R/o House No. 30, Masuriya Balaji, Near New Kohinoor Cinema, Back Side Of Andra Bank, Jodhpur.

2. Lrs. Of Late Smt. Mangi Devi, W/o Punamchand B/c Mewara Kalal 2/1. Shyamlal S/o Lt. Punamchand, B/c Mewara Kalal R/o Old Bus Stand, Rabariyo Ka Bass, Bali, District Pali. 2/2. Smt. Chuniya Bai W/o Lt. Punamchand, B/c Mewara Kalal R/o Old Bus Stand, Rabariyo Ka Bass, Bali, District Pali. 2/3. Smt. Asiya D/o Lt. Punamchand, B/c Mewara Kalal R/o Old Bus Stand, Rabariyo Ka Bass, Bali, District Pali. 2/4. Smt. Hariya D/o Lt. Punamchand, B/c Mewara Kalal R/o Old Bus Stand, Rabariyo Ka Bass, Bali, District Pali.

[2023:RJ-JD:34324] (2 of 4) [CFA-510/2006]

2/5. Smt. Pawan D/o Lt. Punamchand, B/c Mewara Kalal R/o Old Bus Stand, Rabariyo Ka Bass, Bali, District Pali.

3. Gautamraj Alias Kishan Kumar S/o Lt. Pukhraj, B/c Mewara Kalal R/o Loharo Ka Bass, Kalyanpura, Barmer (Raj.).

4. Sampat Raj S/o Pukhraj, B/c Mewara Kalal R/o Loharo Ka Bass, Kalyanpura, Barmer (Raj.). At Present Abu Road, District Sirohi.

                                                                  ----Respondents


For Appellant(s)            :    Mr. J.P. Bhardwaj
For Respondent(s)           :    Mr. Sudheer Sharma
                                 Mr. N.S. Rajpurohit
                                 Mr. Prashant Tatia
                                 Mr. Piyush Chouhan



              HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

                                      Order

11/10/2023

1. In the present appeal, an application has been preferred on

behalf of the appellant Dakhu Devi seeking a permission to

withdraw the present appeal.

2. An application under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil

Procedure was also preferred on behalf of applicant Uttam Kumar

for impleadment in the present appeal. However, subsequently, an

application to withdraw his application for impleadment has been

filed with a submission that he has entered into a compromise

with the parties and hence, does not want to be impleaded.

3. In view of the subsequent application filed on behalf of

Uttam Kumar, the earlier application under Order I Rule 10, CPC is

permitted to be withdrawn.

Both the applications stand disposed of.

[2023:RJ-JD:34324] (3 of 4) [CFA-510/2006]

4. An application under Order XXII Rule 10 A, CPC r.w. under

Order I Rule 10, CPC has also been filed on behalf of legal

representatives of respondent No.1/2 Rajendra Prasad with a

submission that Rajendra Prasad had expired on 04.01.2019 and

his legal representatives have not been impleaded in the present

appeal. Therefore, they be impleaded in the present appeal.

The application is allowed. The legal representatives of

respondent No.1/2 Rajendra Prasad are permitted to be impleaded

as party respondents.

The amended cause title as filed is taken on record.

5. Coming on to the application as preferred on behalf of the

appellant Dakhu Devi for withdrawal of the present appeal.

Admittedly, vide the impugned judgment and decree, the shares

of the plaintiff Rewa Shanker and the defendant Pukh Raj had

been declared to be half share each. No appeal against the

impugned judgment and decree has been preferred by legal

representatives of Rewa Shanker. The present appeal has been

filed by Dakhu Devi, wife of Pukh Raj (defendant No.1).

Therefore, in the opinion of this Court, if the present

appellant is permitted to withdraw the present appeal, the

withdrawal of the same would definitely, not in any manner, affect

the rights of the legal representatives of Rewa Shanker. So far as

the legal representatives of the defendant Pukh Raj are concerned,

counsel appearing for them specifically submit that they have no

objection, if the present appeal is permitted to be withdrawn as a

settlement has been arrived at between all the legal

representatives of the deceased Pukh Raj.

[2023:RJ-JD:34324] (4 of 4) [CFA-510/2006]

6. In view of the above facts, the permission as prayed for

withdrawal of the appeal by the present appellant is granted. The

present appeal is therefore, dismissed as withdrawn.

7. All the pending applications also stand dismissed.

(REKHA BORANA),J 450-Sachin/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)