Remanded

Sunil Kumar Agarwal v. Shri Ram Prakash Agarwal Ors.

Rajasthan HC8 Jan 2020CW/4249/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order remands a matter to the Trial Court to decide an application under Order 14 Rule 5 CPC afresh. The impugned order of 14.3.2012 was set aside as it was a non-speaking order, with consent from both parties.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 14.3.2012 is set-aside; the matter is remanded to the Trial Court to decide the application under Order 14 Rule 5 CPC afresh within one month.

Sunil Kumar Agarwal Vs Shri Ram Prakash… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Rajasthan HC (2020)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5084/2012

¶3

Dinesh Agarwal son of late Balkishan Agrawal

¶4

Prem Lata Agarwal wife of Late Balkishan Agarwal

¶5

Both are residents of Sethani ka bagh, Moti Doongari Road, Jaipur

¶6

----Petitioners-plaintiffs

¶7

Versus

¶8

Shri Chandra Mohan Agarwal son of late Kunj Bihari Lal Narnoli, resident of Sethani ka bagh, Moti Doongari Road, Jaipur 2. Shri Ashish Agarwal son of Shri Kaushal Kishore Agarwal

¶9

Shri Anurag Agarwal son of Shri Kaushal Kishore Agarwal

¶10

Shri Kaushal Kishore Agarwal son of late Kunj Bihari Lal Narnoli

¶11

(2 to 4 are residents of plot No.2, Govind Marg, Narnoli Estate, Moti Doongari Circle, Jaipur)

¶12

----Respondents-defendants

¶13

Shri Ram Prakash Agarwal son of late Kunj Bihari Lal Narnoli, resident of Sethani ka Bagh, Moti Doongari Road, Jaipur. 6. Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwal son of late Kunj Bihari Lal Narnoli, resident of Sethani ka bagh, Moti Doongari Raod, Jaipur

¶14

----Proforma respondents/proforma defendants

¶15

Connected With

¶16

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 4249/2012

¶17

Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwal son of late Kunj Bihari Lal Narnoli, aged about 53 years, resident of Sethani ka bagh, Moti Doongari Raod, Jaipur

¶18

----Petitioner-Plaintiff

¶19

Versus

¶20

Shri Ram Prakash Agarwal son of late Kunj Bihari Lal Narnoli, resident of Sethani ka Bagh, Moti Doongari Road, Jaipur.

¶21

Shri Ashish Agarwal son of Shri Kaushal Kishore Agarwal

¶22

Shri Anurag Agarwal son of Shri Kaushal Kishore Agarwal

¶23

Shri Kaushal Kishore Agarwal son of late Kunj Bihari Lal Narnoli

¶24

(all residents of plot No.2, Govind Marg, Narnoli Estate, Moti Doongari Circle, Jaipur)

¶25

Shri Chandra Mohan Agarwal son of late Kunj Bihari Lal

¶26

(2 of 3)

¶27

[CW-5084/2012]

¶28

Narnoli, resident of Sethani ka bagh, Moti Doongari Road, Jaipur

¶29

----Respondents-defendants

¶30

Dinesh Agarwal son of late Balkishan Agrawal

¶31

Prem Lata Agarwal wife of Late Balkishan Agarwal (Both are residents of Sethani ka bagh, Moti Doongari Road, Jaipur)

¶32

Smt. Preeti Agarwal wife of Shri Manoj Kumar, resident of S- 13, Mahaveer Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur

¶33

Smt. Meenaxi Garg, wife of Shri Anil Garg, resident of House No.60, Rajamal-ka-bagh, Jaipur

¶34

Smt. Krishna Mukut wife of Shri Deepak Mukut, resident of Dwarkapuri, opposite Hotel Rajmahal, Sardar Patel Marg, Jaipur

¶35

----Proforma Respondents/Proforma Defendants

¶36

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Suresh Sahni For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sudesh Bansal

¶37

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH GUPTA

¶38

Order

¶39

08/01/2020

¶40

At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitionersplaintiffs (hereinafter referred to as ‘the plaintiffs’) submits that the impugned order dated 14.3.2012 passed by the Trial Court rejecting the application filed by the plaintiffs is a non speaking order, hence the impugned order be set-aside and the matter be remanded to the learned Trial Court to decide the application under Order 14 Rule 5 CPC afresh.

¶41

Learned counsel for the respondents has no objection if the matter is remanded to the learned Trial Court with the direction to decide the application under Order 14 Rule 5 CPC afresh.

¶42

In this view of the matter, with the consent of learned counsel for both the parties and taking into consideration the fact

¶43

(3 of 3)

¶44

[CW-5084/2012]

¶45

that the order impugned is a non speaking order, the impugned order dated 14.3.2012 passed by the Trial Court is set-aside and the matter is remanded to the Trial Court with the direction to decide the application under Order 14 Rule 5 CPC filed by the plaintiffs afresh within a period of one month from the receipt of certified copy of this order.

¶46

Both the parties are directed to appear before the Trial Court in this regard on 3.2.2020.

¶47

The writ petitions stand disposed of accordingly.

¶48

Registry is directed to place a copy of this order in the connected file.

¶49

(PRAKASH GUPTA),J

¶50

DILIP KHANDELWAL /68-69

Sunil Kumar Agarwal v. Shri Ram Prakash Agarwal Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Kumar Agarwal v. Shri Ram Prakash Agarwal Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ranjeet Singh Sisodiya Son of Ram Singh Vs Chhuttan Lal Bairwa Son of Shri Prahlad Ram Bairwa

Gulab Chand Mittal S/O Late Sh. Panna Lal Mittal Vs the State of Rajasthan

Smt. Sheela Bain Widow W/O Shri Rajendra Bhai Prema Ji Vs Smt. Jamna Bain (Since Deceased) through Legal Heirs

State Bank of India Vs Shiv Charan Gupta Son of Shri Kedar Lal Gupta, Advocate

Naresh Kumar and Sons (Huf) Vs Mahesh Kumar Son of Shri Ramesh Chand Panjwani

Dinesh Agarwal and Anr. Vs Shri Chandra Mohan Agarwal Ors.