[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Tejaram vs Ranaram (2026:Rj-Jd:11856) on 12 March, 2026
[2026:RJ-JD:11856]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3345/2026
1. Tejaram S/o Prabhuram, Aged About 65 Years, R/o Village
Jetpur, Tehsil Rohat District Pali Rajathan.
2. Baluram S/o Sayarram, Aged About 35 Years, R/o Village
Jetpur, Tehsil Rohat District Pali Rajathan.
3. Prakash S/o Sayarram, Aged About 31 Years, R/o Village
Jetpur, Tehsil Rohat District Pali Rajathan.
4. Manohar S/o Sayarram, Aged About 33 Years, R/o Village
Jetpur, Tehsil Rohat District Pali Rajathan.
5. Prakash S/o Durgaram, Aged About 38 Years, R/o Village
Jetpur, Tehsil Rohat District Pali Rajathan.
6. Daulatram S/o Durgaram, Aged About 33 Years, R/o
Village Jetpur, Tehsil Rohat District Pali Rajathan.
7. Sohanlal S/o Durgaram, Aged About 29 Years, R/o Village
Jetpur, Tehsil Rohat District Pali Rajathan.
8. Pachi Devi W/o Durgaram, Aged About 62 Years, R/o
Village Jetpur, Tehsil Rohat District Pali Rajathan.
----Petitioners
Versus
Ranaram Adopted Son of Lalaram, R/o Village Jetpur, Tehsil
Rohat District Pali Rajathan.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Narendra Singh A. Rajpurohit
For Respondent(s) : Mr. A.D. Ujjwal
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKESH RAJPUROHIT
Order
12/03/2026
1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners-
defendants assailing the order dated 28.01.2026 passed by the
learned Additional District Judge, Pali in Civil Misc. Case
No.23/2026, whereby the appellate Court allowed the application
filed by the respondent-plaintiff - Ranaram under Order XLI Rule 5
read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure and stayed
execution of the judgment and decree dated 20.12.2025 passed
by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Pali.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(Uploaded on 13/03/2026 at 05:07:48 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:11856] (2 of 3) [CW-3345/2026]
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the
respondent-plaintiff had instituted a suit for permanent injunction.
During the course of the proceedings, the learned trial Court
considered the report of the Mauka Commissioner and rejected
the application for temporary injunction. Thereafter, upon
appreciation of the evidence available on record as well as the
report of the Mauka Commissioner, the learned trial Court
dismissed the suit vide judgment and decree dated 20.12.2025.
Being aggrieved by the said judgment and decree, the
respondent-plaintiff preferred an appeal along with an application
under Order XLI Rule 5 read with Section 151 CPC seeking stay of
the judgment and decree. The appellate Court, after detailed
consideration and primarily relying upon the report of the Mauka
Commissioner, allowed the stay application and stayed the effect
and operation of the judgment and decree dated 20.12.2025. It is
therefore argued that the order dated 28.01.2026 passed by the
appellate court is illegal and unjust.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent while
supporting the order dated 28.01.2026 passed by the appellate
court, has submitted that the appellate Court, after considering
the relevant grounds for grant of interim protection, has rightly
passed the impugned order and no interference by this Court is
warranted. It is further submitted that the appeal is presently at
the stage of final arguments.
5. Having considered the submissions advanced by learned
counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the impugned order,
this Court finds that the trial Court, after considering and
(Uploaded on 13/03/2026 at 05:07:48 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:11856] (3 of 3) [CW-3345/2026]
appreciating the report of the Mauka Commissioner along with the
material available on record, had first rejected the application for
temporary injunction and thereafter, proceeded to dismiss the suit
itself. However, the appellate Court, relying upon the very same
report of the Mauka Commissioner, has passed the order
impugned granting stay of the judgment and decree passed by the
trial Court. At the same time, it is also noticed that the appeal
itself is pending consideration before the appellate Court and is
stated to be at the stage of final arguments. In such
circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that continuation of the
interim order is not warranted and the interests of justice would
be better served if the appeal itself is decided expeditiously.
6. Accordingly, the order dated 28.01.2026 passed by the
learned Additional District Judge, Pali is set aside. The appellate
Court is directed to decide the appeal expeditiously, preferably
within a period of eight months from today.
7. With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed
of.
8. Stay petition as well as all pending application(s), if any,
shall also stand disposed of accordingly.
9. It is made clear that the appellate Court shall decide the
appeal strictly on its own merits and in accordance with law,
without being prejudiced by any observation made in the present
order.
(MUKESH RAJPUROHIT),J
206-Ramesh/-
(Uploaded on 13/03/2026 at 05:07:48 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
