Dismissed

Mukand Lal deceased through Lrs. Dharam Pal v. Kamlesh (Deleted) Sh. Sunil and others

Himachal Pradesh HC3 Jul 2024RSA/189/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appeal against concurrent dismissal of a declaration and injunction suit claiming joint ownership of suit land and illegality of partition and mutation. Counsel for appellants sought leave to withdraw as partition proceedings were pending before revenue authorities. The High Court dismissed the appeal as not pressed with liberty to pursue alternative remedies.

What the court decided

AI extract

Mukand Lal deceased through Lrs. Dharam Pal Vs Kamlesh… — Partition | Himachal Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

2024:HHC:4409

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA

¶3

RSA No. 189 of 2020 Decided on: 03.07.2024

¶4

Dharam Pal and another .…Appellants

¶5

Versus

¶6

Sunil and others …Respondents Coram

¶7

*The Hon’ble Mr. Justice* Whether approved for re	*Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge.* porting?¹
For the appellants :	Mr. Rajender Sharma, Advocate.
For the respondents :	Ms. Saroj, Advocate vice Mr. Neel Kamal Sharma, Advocate for respondents No. 2 to 5.
:	Name of respondent No. 1 stands deleted.
:	None for respondents No. 7(a)to 7(c).
Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge	(Oral)

¶8

By way of this appeal, the appellants assail the judgments and decrees passed by the learned Courts below, in terms whereof, the suit filed by the appellants was dismissed and same was the fate of the appeal also.

¶9

A perusal of the judgments and decrees passed by learned Courts below demonstrates that a suit for declaration and permanent prohibitory as well as mandatory injunction filed by the appellants/plaintiffs against the defendants/respondents to the effect that the suit land was joint between the parties and had 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

¶10

¶11

not been partitioned as per law and the alleged partition was got effected by defendant No. 1 in connivance with revenue officers and mutation entered pursuant thereto was illegal, null and void and not binding upon the plaintiffs, was dismissed. In appeal, learned Appellate Court upheld the findings so returned by the learned Trial Court.

¶12

Learned Counsel for the appellants submits that as the issue relating to the partition is still pending adjudication before the revenue authorities and some of the parties have preferred the appeal against the order passed therein, therefore, interest of justice would be served, in case, the appellant is permitted not to press the present appeal but with liberty to pursue all such legal remedies as may be available to them in law against the partition proceedings.

¶13

In view of the request so made by learned Counsel for the appellants, this appeal is dismissed as not pressed. The appellants shall be at liberty to pursue such other alternative remedies against the partition proceedings as may be available to them in law, subject to all just exceptions. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.

¶14

(Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge

¶15

July 03, 2024 (narender)

Mukand Lal deceased through Lrs. Dharam Pal v. Kamlesh (Deleted) Sh. Sunil and others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Mukand Lal deceased through Lrs. Dharam Pal v. Kamlesh (Deleted) Sh. Sunil and others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Usha Devi Vs State of Hp and Others

Prem Singh Vs Dalip Singh and Others

Unnati Goyal Vs State of Hp and Another

Bishan Singh Vs State of Hp and Others

Sukh Ram Vs the State of Hp and Others

Arvind Kumar and Others Vs State of Hp and Another