Mohammad Shakeel vs Smt. Shanta Devi (2025:Rj-Jd:41759)
2025 Latest Caselaw 13444 Raj

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Mohammad Shakeel vs Smt. Shanta Devi (2025:Rj-Jd:41759) on 18 September, 2025

Author: Farjand Ali

Bench: Farjand Ali

[2025:RJ-JD:41759]

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                       JODHPUR
                S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17142/2025

Mohammad Shakeel S/o Moinuddin, Aged About 59 Years,
Resident Of H. No. 13, Bhesrod Garh Ki Haveli, Moti Chohatta
Udaipur (Rajasthan).
                                                                       ----Petitioner
                                      Versus
1.       Smt. Shanta Devi W/o Late Shri Raghuveer Singh
         Choudhary, Resident Of 448, Adarsh Nagar, Main Road,
         Gariawas, Udaipur (Raj.).
2.       Mr. Ajay Chaudhary S/o Late Raghuveer Singh Chaudhary,
         Resident Of 448, Adarsh Nagar, Main Road, Gariawas,
         Udaipur (Raj.).
3.       Renu D/o Late Raghuveer Singh Chaudhary W/o Rajveer
         Ji Chaudhary, Resident Of 448, Adarsh Nagar, Main Road,
         Gariawas, Udaipur (Raj.).
4.       Mrs. Suman W/o Mr. Bharat D/o Late Mr. Raghuveer Singh
         Chaudhary, Resident Of 448, Adarsh Nagar, Main Road,
         Gariawas, Udaipur (Raj.).
5.       Mrs.   Ritu    W/o      Roshan        D/o     Late        Raghuveer   Singh
         Chaudhary, Resident Of 448, Adarsh Nagar, Main Road,
         Gariawas, Udaipur (Raj.).
                                                                    ----Respondents


For Petitioner(s)           :     Mr. Gaurav Shrimali
For Respondent(s)           :     -



                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

18/09/2025

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and gone through

niceties of the matter so also gone through order under assail.

2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that the petitioner being

plaintiff filed a civil suit for specific performance of the contract on

the ground that an agreement got executed between him and the

(Uploaded on 23/09/2025 at 12:57:26 PM)

[2025:RJ-JD:41759] (2 of 2) [CW-17142/2025]

defendant. It was averred that he was ready and willing to

perform his part but the defendant was not agreeable, therefore,

he was made to file the suit. Along with the suit, an application for

temporary injunction was also filed. Learned trial court passed an

ad interim order restraining defendant from alienating the

property in any manner. The petitioner also filed an application

under Order 39 Rule 7 of the C.P.C. for bringing on record the

present site situation of the suit property. Learned trial court

dismissed the said application, hence the instant petition.

3. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court

feels that in a suit for specific performance of the contract it is not

imperative for the Court to bring on record the current condition of

the suit property. Perhaps the plaintiff seeks to use the process of

Court just to collect evidence in his favour and it is not

permissible. Reliance can be placed on judgment _____ AIR 1978

___.

4. No case is made out, accordingly the instant petition is

disposed of.

5. Pending applications, if any, are also disposed of.

(FARJAND ALI),J 320-chhavi/-

(Uploaded on 23/09/2025 at 12:57:26 PM)

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)