Disposed

Nagar Nigam Ajmer v. Smt Najma Begum W/O Shri Sayed Mohd. Afak

Rajasthan HC10 Jul 2019CW/9637/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged the appellate court's order allowing the respondent's appeal against rejection of a temporary injunction. The High Court held no illegality was committed below and directed the trial court to decide the main suit expeditiously once pleadings and material are submitted.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition stands disposed of with direction to the Trial Court to decide the main suit on priority basis upon completion of pleadings.

Nagar Nigam Ajmer Vs Smt Najma Begum W/O Shri Sayed… — Property and Title | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9637/2019

¶3

Nagar Nigam Ajmer, Through Its Chief Executive Officer (Commissioner), Ajmer (Raj.)

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

Smt Najma Begum W/o Shri Sayed Mohd. Afak, Aged About 80 Years, By Caste Muslim, Resident Of 321-A/26, Christian Ganj, Ajmer (Raj.)

¶7

----Respondent

¶8

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Brij Kishore Sharma Adv.

¶9

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR GAUR

¶10

Order

¶11

10/07/2019

¶12

The present writ petition has been filed by the petitionerNagar Nigam challenging the order dt. 18^th March, 2019, passed by the Appellate Court, whereby the appeal filed by the respondent against rejection of her Temporary Injunction Application vide order dt. 5^th February, 2019, has been allowed.

¶13

Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Civil Court while rejecting the Temporary Injunction Application vide order dt. 5^th February, 2019, had recorded a finding that no prima-facie case was made out in favour of the respondent and as such the Temporary Injunction Application was rejected.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the Appellate Court has reversed the order dt. 5^th February, 2019, without any justification and further the direction has been given to the

¶15

(2 of 2)

¶16

[CW-9637/2019]

¶17

petitioner for not creating any hindrance in the construction, which has already been made by way of a wall.

¶18

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Appellate Court ought to have considered that the respondent was an encroacher and claim of the respondent to prove prima-facie case was not made at all and encroacher should not have been given such protection, as has been given by the Appellate Court.

¶19

I have gone through the order passed by the Courts below.

¶20

This Court finds that the Court below has found that the respondent had constructed a wall near/over the disputed plot in question and further she has also kept one Almirah, however, she has been restrained to carry out any commercial activities by using the same. This Court finds that the Court below has not committed any illegality in passing the order dt. 18^th March, 2019.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in such cases, where there is encroachment made on the public land, the disputes are required to be decided by the Trial Court in expeditious manner and as such permission is sought by the learned counsel for giving a direction to the Trial Court for deciding the suit in expeditious manner.

¶22

This Court finds that if the parties complete their pleadings and the relevant material is also brought before the Court below, the Trial Court will take up the matter on priority basis and decide the main suit itself in expeditious manner.

¶23

Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of.

¶24

(ASHOK KUMAR GAUR),J

¶25

Monika/11

Nagar Nigam Ajmer v. Smt Najma Begum W/O Shri Sayed Mohd. Afak

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nagar Nigam Ajmer v. Smt Najma Begum W/O Shri Sayed Mohd. Afak

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

Smt. Veena Meel Wife of Shri Banwari Lal Meel Vs Mukesh Saran Son of Shri Ratan Prakash Saran

Smt. Veena Meel Wife of Shri Banwari Lal Meel Vs Mukesh Saran Son of Shri Ratan Prakash Saran

M/S Pyramid I T Consulting Pvt. Ltd. Vs Board of Secondary Education Rajasthan, Ajmer

Parmeshwar Prasad S/O Ghamandi Prasad Vs Murarilal S/O Late Onkarmal by Caste Brahmin

Mukesh Chand Gurjar Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Kapil Kumar Khandelwal Vs University of Raj and Anr.