Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Tara Kanwar vs Dalveer Singh Rajawat ... on 16 October, 2024

Author: Kuldeep Mathur

Bench: Kuldeep Mathur

[2024:RJ-JD:42204]                      (1 of 5)                       [CW-16924/2024]


      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16924/2024

Tara Kanwar D/o Shri Gulab Singh, Aged About 60 Years, W/o
Shri Inder Singh Gehlot, R/o Sadar Bazaar, Kalandri, Tehsil And
District Sirohi.
                                                                       ----Petitioner
                                       Versus
1.       Dalveer Singh Rajawat S/o Shri Mohan Singh, R/o Jawal
         Tehsil And District Sirohi.
2.       Dungar Singh S/o Late Shri Gulab Singh, R/o Kumharon
         Ki Gali, Hariji Road, Village Jawal, Tehsil And District
         Sirohi.
                                                                    ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)            :     Mr. Rakesh Arora
For Respondent(s)            :     -



            HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR

Order

16/10/2024

By way of filing the instant writ petition under Article

226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for

the following relief:

"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this writ petition may kindly be allowed with costs and by issuing an appropriate writ, order or direction the impugned order dated 27.08.2024 (Annex.8) passed by learned Addl. District Judge, Sirohi, may kindly be quashed and set aside and the application filed by the petitioner under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC (Annex.6) may kindly be allowed as prayed for."

2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the respondent No.1-

plaintiff Dalveer Singh had filed a suit for eviction and recovery of

arrears of rent and mesne profits against the respondent No.2-

defendant Dungar Singh before the learned Civil Judge, Sirohi.

[2024:RJ-JD:42204] (2 of 5) [CW-16924/2024]

The learned Civil Judge, Sirohi after completion of full fledged

trial, vide judgment and decree dated 12.9.2019 had decreed the

suit filed by the respondent No.1- plaintiff and ordered that the

suit premises shall be evicted by the respondent No.2- defendant

and possession thereof be handed over to the respondent No.1-

plaintiff. The respondent No.2- defendant being aggrieved by the

judgment and decree dated 12.9.2019 filed an appeal before

learned District Judge, Sirohi.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the present

petitioner is real brother of respondent No.2- defendant Dungar

Singh and he is having 1/6th share in the property in dispute. The

respondent No.2- defendant has illegally sold the said property to

respondent No.1- plaintiff Dalveer Singh through a sale deed

executed on 8.1.2015. The petitioner upon gaining knowledge

about aforesaid transaction, filed a suit No.03/2022 before the

learned Civil Judge, Sirohi seeking cancellation of the sale deed

dated 8.1.2015. It was contended that simultaneously, an

application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC was also came to be filed

by the petitioner in the appeal pending before the learned District

Judge, Sirohi against the judgment and decree dated 12.9.2019.

The application filed by the petitioner was rejected on the ground

that the present suit is in respect of possession and eviction on

the basis of the relationship between respondent No.1- plaintiff

Dalveer Singh and the respondent No.2- defendant Dungar Singh

and therefore, the petitioner is not required to be impleaded as

party respondent in the matter as he is not a proper party.

Learned counsel further submitted that while passing the

impugned order dated 27.8.2024, the learned District Judge,

[2024:RJ-JD:42204] (3 of 5) [CW-16924/2024]

Sirohi had failed to consider that the petitioner is directly

interested in the tenanted premises by way of his entitlement

towards his 1/6th share in the said property. It was thus prayed

that the order impugned dated 27.8.2024 may be quashed and

set aside and the petitioner may be impleaded as party defendant

in the appeal pending against the judgment and decree dated

12.9.2019.

4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Perused the

material available on record.

5. The relevant portion of the impugned order dated 27.8.2024

is reproduced hereinbelow for the sake of ready reference:-

Þ izkFkhZ;k ds gLrxr izkFkZuk i= dk tokc jsLiksMsUV dh vksj ls fn;k x;k rFkk rdZ fn;s fd

izkFkhZ;k rkjkdqaoj Lo- xqykcflag dh iq=h gksuk vLohdkj gSA izkFkZuk i= ds in la- 1 esa of.kZr edku

jsLiksMsUV nyohjflag ds LokfeRo rFkk dCts dk gSA xqykcflag dh e`R;q gksuk Lohdkj gS ijUrq izkFkhZ;k dk

mä vkoklh; edku esa 1@6 fgLlk gksuk xyr gSA xyr rF;ksa ij izkFkhZ;k }kjk flfoy U;k;ky; esa

okn izLrqr fd;k gSA oknxzLr edku ij izkFkhZ;k dk dksbZ vf/kdkj ugha gSA jsLiksMsUV oknxzLr laifÙk ds

ln~Hkkfod Øsrk gSA izkFkhZ;k us vihykaV ds lkFk nqHkZlaf/k dj izkFkZuk i= izLrqr fd;k gS tks lO;; [kkfjt

fd;k tkosA

nksuksa i{kksa dks lquk x;kA i=koyh dk voyksdu fd;k x;kA gLrxr vihy flfoy U;k;k/kh"k]

fljksgh ds ewyokn izdj.k la- 05@2016 ds fu.kZ; fnukad 12&09&2019 ds fo:) izLrqr dh xbZ gS mä

okn la- 05@2016 ftlesa fd oknh nyohjflag }kjk Mqaxjflag ds fo:) okn okLrs [kkyh djkus ifjlj]

olwyh fdjk;k 8000@& o gtkZuk dk izLrqr fd;k Fkk ftlesa fopkj.k U;k;ky; }kjk oknh dks oknxzLr

edku dk Lokeh o izfroknh Mqaxjflag dks mldk fdjk;snkj ekurs gq, ifjlj dks [kkyh djkus dk vkns"k

fn;k rFkk fnukad 12&09&2019 dks fu.kZ; o fMØh ikfjr dhA gLrxr izkFkZuk i= esa izkFkhZ;k }kjk ;g

dgrs gq, fd Mqaxjflag tksfd mldk HkkbZ gS rFkk gLrxr vihy esa fdjk;snkj gS muds firk xqykcflag

dh laifÙk Fkh tks Mqaxjflag }kjk mä izR;FkhZ rFkk okn la- 05@16 ds oknh nyohjflag dks cspku dh xbZ

gS tcfd nyohjflag dks mä laifÙk cspku djus dk vf/kdkj ugha Fkk rFkk bl laca/k esa izkFkhZ;k }kjk

[2024:RJ-JD:42204] (4 of 5) [CW-16924/2024]

vyx ls okn la- 03@2022 flfoy U;k;k/kh"k] fljksgh ds le{k mä foØ; foys[k dks fujLr djkus gsrq

okn izLrqr djuk dfFkr fd;k gSA

vr% izkFkhZ;k ds Lo;a ds vfHkopuksa ls ;g Li'V gS fd izkFkhZ;k }kjk Mqaxjflag }kjk nyohjflag ds

i{k esa fd;s x;s foØ; foys[k dks fujLr djkus dk okn vyx ls izLrqr fd;k x;k gS rFkk mä foØ;

foys[k oS/k ;k voS/k Fkk] bl laca/k esa fu.kZ; Hkh mä okn esa gksuk gSA gLrxr okn ek= nyohjflag o

Mqaxjflag ds e/; edku ekfyd o fdjk;snkj ds laca/k dks ns[krs gq, fu.khZr fd;k x;k gS rFkk mlh dh

gLrxr vihy yafcr gSA bl vihy esa ;fn izkFkhZ;k dks i{kdkjk cuk;k tkrk gS rc LokfeRo dCts dks

ysdj ,d u;k fookn U;k;ky; ds lkeus gksxk] tcfd izkFkhZ;k }kjk bl laca/k esa vyx ls okn flfoy

U;k;k/kh"k] fljksgh ds U;k;ky; esa izLrqr fd;k tk pqdk gSA tcfd gLrxr vihy ek= edku ekfyd

fdjk;snkj ds fookn laca/kh okn la- 05@2016 ds fo:) izLrqr dh xbZ gSA bl laca/k esa izkFkhZ;k dh vksj

ls izLrqr U;kf;d n`'Vkar 2022 (4) DNJ (SC) 1309 Moreshar Yadaorao

Mahajan vs. Vyankatesh Sitaram Bhedi izLrqr fd;k x;k gS ftlesa ekuuh;

loksZPp U;k;ky; }kjk ;g vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k x;k gS fd fofufnZ'V vuqrks'k ds ekeys esa vko";d i{kdkj

dh vuqifLFkfr esa izHkkoh fMØh ikfjr ugha dh tk ldrh gSA blh izdkj ,d vU; U;kf;d n`'Vkar 2018

(3) DNJ (Raj.) 910 Hargovind Nirbhik vs. UIT Kota Thro's its

Secretary & Anr. izLrqr fd;k x;k gS ftlesa ekuuh; jkt- mPp U;k;ky; }kjk ;g vfHkfu/kkZfjr

fd;k x;k gS fd tgka Øsrk gS ;w-vkbZ-Vh- us fnukad 02&09&2014 dks jsLiksMsUV dk iÍk [kkfjt fd;k

rFkk vkosnd dk okn Hkwfe esa fgr&fu.khZr fd;k rFkk jsLiksMsUV dks izfroknh ds :i esa i{kdkjk cuk;s

tkus dh vuqefr nhA gLrxr izdj.k ek= fdjk;snkj o edku ekfyd ds laca/kksa ij ikfjr fu.kZ; ds

fo:) izLrqr vihy ls lacaf/kr gS tcfd mä nksuksa gh U;kf;d n`'Vkarksa esa edku ekfyd o fdjk;snkj ds

laca/k fookfnr ugha jgs gSaA vr% mä izkFkhZ;k dh vksj ls izLrqr U;kf;d n`'Vkar gLrxr izdj.k ds rF;ksa

ls fHkUu gksus ds dkj.k gLrxr izdj.k ij pLik ugha gksrs gSaA

vr% izkFkhZ;k dh vksj ls izLrqr izkFkZuk i= varxZr vkns"k 01 fu;e 10 lifBr /kkjk 151

lh-ih-lh- vLohdkj dj [kkfjt fd;s tkus ;ksX; gksus ls vLohdkj dj [kkfjt fd;k tkrk gSA

izdj.k U;k;ky; ds VkjxsVsM izdj.kksa esa ls ,d gS vkbZUnk mHk; i{k vko";d :i ls cgl

djsA i=koyh okLrs cgl vihy fnukad 02&09&2024 dks is"k gksAß