Dismissed

Girvar Prasad andANR v. Jagdish Chhabra

Rajasthan HC3 May 2017WMAP/203/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a miscellaneous application concerning an eviction petition on grounds of bonafide necessity, the court dismissed the prayer to correct an order or direct the Appellate Tribunal to consider subsequent events. The court ruled that rights crystallize at the suit's filing and allowing subsequent events here would lead to endless delays. The consent order stands unvaried.

What did the court decide?

The application for correction and modification of the order and direction to Appellate Tribunal to consider subsequent events was dismissed.

Girvar Prasad andANR Vs Jagdish Chhabra — Landlord and Tenant | Rajasthan HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

¶3

AT JAIPUR BENCH

¶4

ORDER

¶5

S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Application No.203/2017

¶6

in (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9693 / 2017)

¶7

Girvar Prasad s/o Shri Makkhan Lal, aged 62 years caste Mahajan R/o Malan ki Gali, Pansari Bazar, Alwar (Raj.)

¶8

Satish Kumar S/o Shri Makkhan Lal, aged 50 years caste Mahajan R/o Malan ki Gali, Pansari Bazar, Alwar (Raj.)

¶9

--- Petitioner/ Applicants

¶10

Versus

¶11

Jagdish Chhabra s/o Shri Tek Chand Chhabra r/o Shanti Niwas, Mahavir Marg, Alwar (Raj.)

¶12

--- Respondent- Non applicant

Date of Order:

May 03, 2017.

PRESENT

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SHARMA

¶17

Mr. S.C. Gupta, for the petitioner.

¶18

BY THE COURT :

¶19

The matter comes up on a miscellaneous application praying that the order dated 21-2-2017 in SBCWP No.9693/2016 be corrected and modified and the Appellate Tribunal be directed to take into consideration the subsequent events as stated in the tenant’s application under Order 6 Rule 17 CPC filed before it while deciding the appeal.

¶20

Heard. Considered.

¶21

The matter was heard on previous occasion and an agreed order was passed in three petitions, which on consent was confined to consideration of the petitioner's application for taking on record

¶22

¶23

additional evidence under Order 41 Rule 27 CPC at the time of the decision of the appeal in consonance the judgment of the Apex Court. No variation of the consent order can now be made. Further it would be in place to state that subsequent events being taken on record is not open ended. In cases where an eviction petition is laid on the ground of bonafide and personal necessity, all subsequent events inevitable as they will be with passage of time can not mechanically to be taken on record, for if they were, it would become unending process and delay final adjudications. Rights of the parties crystalise at the commencement of a lis, with the filing of the suit/ petition. Subsequent events only when they eclipse the very cause of action can be taken on record in the court's discretion. This situation does not obtain in the case at hand. The appellate court's impugned order dated 5-5-2016 so clearly states.

¶24

I find no force in the application. Dismissed.

(Alok Sharma), J.

arn/

All corrections made in the order have been incorporated in the order being emailed.

¶29

Arun Kumar Sharma, Private Secretary.

Girvar Prasad andANR v. Jagdish Chhabra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Girvar Prasad andANR v. Jagdish Chhabra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jagdish and Ors. Vs B O R Ajmer and Ors.

Bharat Singh and Ors. Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Dr Soniya Jindal Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Ganesh Malakar and Anr. Vs State of Rajasthan through P P

Durga Shankar MEENAandANR Vs Raju Lal andORS

Kiran Devi Vs State of Rajasthan through P P