Petitioner challenged under Article 226 the trial court's dismissal of his application to dismiss a partition suit. The High Court found no ground for interference as the status of the property remained to be determined during the trial.
The writ petition was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16510/2019
Aamil Khan S/o Irfan Khan, Aged About 35 Years, By Caste Musalman, Resident Of Tabela Road, Jhalawar (Rajasthan)
----Petitioner
Versus
(2 of 4)
[CW-16510/2019]
(3 of 4)
[CW-16510/2019]
Resident Of Jhalawar.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjay Mehrishi
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA
Judgment / Order
14/10/2019
Petitioner has filed this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 12.12.2019.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record available on the file carefully.
Respondents No.1 to 4 have filed suit for partition and cancellation of sale deed and challenging the Will executed by Bardi Bai. Petitioner has been arrayed as defendant No.27 in the suit filed by respondents No.1 to 4.
Petitioner moved an application before the trial court that suit qua him be dismissed as he had purchased the property mentioned in para No.2 of the plaint through registered sale deed from owner Bardi Bai. The said application was dismissed by the trial court vide the impugned order. Learned Trial Court has observed that it was yet to be determined as to whether the property purchased by the petitioner was the ancestral property of Bardi Bai or it was herself acquired property. It is the case of the petitioner that the property purchased by him was not ancestral property of the seller Bardi Bai whereas, it was the case of the plaintiffs that property in the hands of Bardi Bai was her ancestral
(4 of 4)
[CW-16510/2019]
property. However, the said question would be decided by the trial court after the parties lead their evidence in respect of their pleas.
Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the present case, learned Trial Court had rightly dismissed the application moved by the petitioner for dismissing the suit qua him. Hence, no ground for interference is made out.
Dismissed.
(SABINA),J
Sanjay Kumawat-92
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court is justified in refusing to interfere with the trial court's order dismissing the petitioner's application to dismiss the suit.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Aamil Khan
Shanti Bai
Bhawani Shankar
Harish
Jyoti
Sabina
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
