Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Smt. Devki Alias Deu Devi vs Mahendra Kumar (2025:Rj-Jd:44504) on 9 October, 2025
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2025:RJ-JD:44504]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 461/2024
1. Smt. Devki Alias Deu Devi W/o Santosh Kumar, Aged
About 63 Years, R/o Mochiyo Ka Bas, Near Mataji Temple,
Ganesh Dungari, Kuchaman City, Dist. Deedwana-
Kuchaman
2. Mahesh @ Lalchand S/o Sanotsh Kumar, Aged About 32
Years, R/o Mochiyo Ka Bas, Near Mataji Temple, Ganesh
Dungari, Kuchaman City, Dist. Deedwana-Kuchaman
3. Smt. Monika D/o Santosh Kumar, Aged About 37 Years,
R/o Mochiyo Ka Bas, Near Mataji Temple, Ganesh
Dungari, Kuchaman City, Dist. Deedwana-Kuchaman
4. Smt. Soniya D/o Santosh Kumar, Aged About 30 Years, R/
o Mochiyo Ka Bas, Near Mataji Temple, Ganesh Dungari,
Kuchaman City, Dist. Deedwana-Kuchaman Commerical
Address- Mata Rani Sadies, Near Govt. Girsl Higher
Secondary School And Roadwaya\s Bus Stand, Kuchaman
City
----Appellants
Versus
Mahendra Kumar S/o Madan Mohan, R/o Kuchaman Dist.
Deedwana-Kuchaman
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Sudhir Sharma
Mr. Himanshu Tak
Mr. Ravi Rai
Ms. Urmila Chouhan
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Narendra Thanvi
Mr. Mahendra Thanvi
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order
09/10/2025
1. The present appeal under Section 96 of CPC has been filed
by the appellants seeking the following reliefs:-
(Uploaded on 10/10/2025 at 05:40:20 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:44504] (2 of 4) [CFA-461/2024]
"It is therefore, most humbly & respectfully prayed
that the present First Appeal may kindly be allowed and
the impugned judgment & Decree dated 06.07.2024,
passed by Learned Additional District Judge Kuchaman
City, District Deedwana- Kuchaman in Civil Original Suit
No.111/2021(60/2013) may kindly be quashed and set
aside.
Any other appropriate order or direction which this
Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the case may also kindly be passed in
favour of the appellant."
2. Upon perusal of the impugned judgment and decree dated
06.07.2024, this Court finds that the learned trial Court after
examining the oral and documentary evidences presented before
it by both the parties, reached to a definite conclusion that the
respondent-plaintiff is/was the owner of the shop in question. A
rent deed (kirayanama) was executed between him and husband
of the appellant No.1- defendant. The tenants i.e. defendants did
not pay rent of the shop in question for 29 months i.e. from
December, 2010 to March, 2013 despite repeated requests and
legal notices to them. Due to failure of the appellants- defendants
(tenants) to pay the rent, the respondent- plaintiff terminated
their tenancy vide a notice dated 30.04.2013. No concrete oral or
documentary evidence was produced before the learned trial Court
to establish that appellants- defendants had paid outstanding rent
to the respondent- plaintiff. Accordingly, learned trial Court vide
impugned judgment and decree dated 06.07.2024 directed
appellants- defendants to handover the vacant possession of the
shop to the respondent- plaintiff and pay the outstanding rent of
the shop in question from the month of December, 2010 to April,
2013 amounting to Rs.43,500/- and thereafter, pay rent of
(Uploaded on 10/10/2025 at 05:40:20 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:44504] (3 of 4) [CFA-461/2024]
Rs.5,000/- till handing over vacant possession of the shop for use
and occupation of the same.
3. This Court upon perusal of the impugned judgment and
decree finds no illegality and perversity or error in the judgment
and decree dated 06.07.2024 passed by the learned trial Court.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants- defendants
after attempting to argue the matter for some time submitted that
the appellants- defendants are not in a position to pay the arrears
of outstanding rent for shop in question and, therefore, he prayed
that the same may be modified to Rs.4,50,000/- in total and
further, the appellants- defendants may be granted three months
time to hand over the vacant possession of the shop in question to
the respondent- plaintiff.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent- plaintiff on being asked
by the Court submitted that he has no objection in case the
impugned judgment and decree dated 06.07.2024 is modified to
the effect that the appellants- defendants will now be liable to pay
Rs.4,50,000/- in total against the outstanding rent and that they
shall handover the vacant possession of the shop in question to
the respondent- plaintiff within a period of three months from
today.
6. In view of aforesaid, the present first appeal is disposed of
by modifying the operative portion of judgment and decree dated
06.07.2024 passed by the learned Additional District Judge
Kuchaman City, District Deedwana- Kuchaman in Civil Original Suit
No.111/2021 (60/2013) in the following manner:-
(a) The appellants- defendants shall pay a sum of
Rs.4,50,000/- in total to the respondent- plaintiff within one
(Uploaded on 10/10/2025 at 05:40:20 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:44504] (4 of 4) [CFA-461/2024]
month from today against outstanding rent for the shop in
question.
(b) The appellants- defendants shall handover the vacant
possession of the shop in question to the respondent- plaintiff
within a period of three months from today.
7. It is made clear that if the appellants- defendants fail to
adhere to the any of the aforementioned agreed terms and
conditions, then the respondent- plaintiff shall be at liberty to get
the judgment and decree dated 06.07.2024 passed by the learned
Additional District Judge Kuchaman City, District Deedwana-
Kuchaman in Civil Original Suit No.111/2021 (60/2013) executed
in accordance with law.
8. Stay petition stands disposed of.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J
167-divya/-
(Uploaded on 10/10/2025 at 05:40:20 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
