Dismissed

Prabhu Narayan v. Smt. Saroj and Ors.

Rajasthan HC12 Feb 2021CCOFA/10/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order allowed the transposition of Manish Mathur and Ravi Mathur as respondents and appellants respectively under the Civil Procedure Code. It permitted counsel to drop Vakalatnama for other parties and recorded a compromise dismissing the First Appeal, Cross Objection, and counter claim as withdrawn.

What did the court decide?

Applications for transposition allowed; Vakalatnama withdrawal permitted; First Appeal, Cross Objection, and counter claim dismissed as withdrawn.

Prabhu Narayan Vs Smt. Saroj and Ors. — Property and Title | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

¶2

JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 247/2014

¶4

Smt. Saroj wife of Late Shri Kailash Narayan Ji, Resident of 4-F-60, New Power House Road, Jodhpur.

¶5

Smt. Kiran wife of Vinod Mathur D/o Late Shri Kailash Narayan Ji, R/o 21-E-362, Chopasani Housing Board, Jodhpur.

¶6

Smt. Suman w/o Shri Swaroop Roy D/o Late Shri Kailash Narayan Ji, R/o 4-Ka-16, Pratap Nagar, Jodhpur.

¶7

Smt. Nitila Mathur wife of Raunak D/o Late Shri Kailash Narayan Ji, R/o 25, Gayatri Nagar, Pal Balaji, Jodhpur.

¶8

Smt. Antima Mathur wife of Pankaj Roy D/o Late Shri Kailash Narayan Ji, R/o Badlon Ka Chowk, Jodhpur.

¶9

----Appellants

¶10

Versus

¶11

Lrs of Prabhu Narayan :

¶12

1/1. Manish Mathur son of Late Kailash Narayan,

¶13

1/2. Ravi Mathur son of Late Kailash Narayan, Residents of 4-F-60, New Power House Road, Jodhpur.

¶14

Assistant Engineer, B-III,Medical College, Jodhpur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Jodhpur.

¶15

----Respondents

¶16

Connected With

¶17

S.B. Civ.cros.obj.fir App No. 10/2014

¶18

Lrs of Prabhu Narayan :

¶19

1/1. Manish Mathur son of Late Kailash Narayan,

¶20

1/2. Ravi Mathur son of Late Kailash Narayan, Residents of 4-F-60, New Power House Road, Jodhpur.

¶21

----Appellant

¶22

Versus

¶23

Smt. Saroj wife of Late Shri Kailash Narayan Ji,

¶24

Resident of 4-F-60, New Power House Road, Jodhpur.

¶25

Smt. Kiran wife of Vinod Mathur D/o Late Shri Kailash Narayan Ji, R/o 21-E-362, Chopasani Housing Board, Jodhpur.

¶26

Smt. Suman w/o Shri Swaroop Roy D/o Late Shri Kailash Narayan Ji, R/o 4-Ka-16, Pratap Nagar, Jodhpur.

¶27

Smt. Nitila Mathur wife of Raunak D/o Late Shri Kailash Narayan Ji, R/o 25, Gayatri Nagar, Pal Balaji, Jodhpur.

¶28

(2 of 4)

¶29

Smt. Antima Mathur wife of Pankaj Roy D/o Late Shri Kailash Narayan Ji, R/o Badlon Ka Chowk, Jodhpur.

¶30

Assistant Engineer, B-III, Medical College, Jodhpur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Jodhpur.

¶31

----Respondents

¶32

For Appellant(s) : Mr. C.P. Soni – in Appeal No.247/2014. Mr. H.R. Soni–in Cross Obj. No.10/2014. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mahesh Joshi.

¶33

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN BHANSALI Order

¶34

12/02/2021

¶35

S.B. Civil First Appeal No.247/2014 was filed by appellants - Smt. Saroj, Manish Mathur, Ravi, Smt. Kiran, Smt. Suman, Smt. Nitila Mathur and Smt. Antima Mathur against respondent - Prabhu Narayan Mathur & Assistant Engineer, JVVNL, Jodhpur aggrieved against the judgment & decree dated 22.01.2013 passed by the Additional District Judge No.1, Jodhpur Metro in Civil Original Suit No.35/11, whereby the suit filed by the appellants was rejected and counter claim filed by Prabhu Narayan Mathur was allowed.

¶36

The respondent Prabhu Narayan Mathur filed cross-objection under Order XLI, Rule 22 CPC being S.B. Civil Cross Objection No.10/2014 against the appellants as well as A.En., JVVNL.

¶37

By the interim order dated 24.09.2014, judgment & decree dated 27.01.2013 as modified vide order dated 01.07.2014 was stayed subject to conditions indicated in the order.

¶38

During the pendency of the appeal and cross-objection Prabhu Narayan Mathur, the defendant died on 19.08.2020.

¶39

An application dated 21.11.2020 was filed seeking decision of the appeal and cross-objection based on the fact that deceased

¶40

(3 of 4)

¶41

Prabhu Narayan Mathur has executed a will in favour of Manish Mathur and Ravi Mathur.

¶42

The matter was adjourned on the said application when the same came up before the Court.

¶43

Whereafter, now fresh applications have been filed in the appeal as well as cross-objection, wherein application has been filed by Manish Mathur & Ravi Mathur, original appellant Nos.2 & 3, seeking impleadment / transposition under Order I, Rule 10(2) CPC & Order XXII, Rule 10 CPC, as respondents in the appeal based on the will said to have been executed by Prabhu Narayan Mathur.

¶44

Another application has been filed by learned counsel Mr. H.R. Soni under Order III, Rule 4 CPC seeking to drop his Vakalatnama for appellants other than Manish Mathur & Ravi Mathur - original appellant Nos.2 & 3.

¶45

Similarly, in cross-objection applications have been filed under Order I, Rule 10(2) CPC and Order III, Rule 4 CPC, wherein said Manish Mathur & Ravi Mathur have sought transposition / impleadment as appellants and learned counsel Mr. H.R. Soni has sought dropping of his Vakalatnama for the respondents in the cross-objection other than said Manish Mathur & Ravi Mathur.

¶46

Simultaneously, learned counsel Mr. C.P. Soni has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of all the appellants in S.B. Civil First Appeal No.247/2014 other than Manish Mathur & Ravi Mathur and for the respondents in S.B. Civil Cross Objection No.10/2014 other than Manish Mathur, Ravi Mathur & A.En., JVVNL.

¶47

Further, in the first appeal, a compromise has been filed, which bears thumb impression of Smt. Saroj and signed by Smt. Kiran, Smt. Suman, Smt. Nitila Mathur & Smt. Antima Mathur

¶48

(4 of 4)

¶49

identified by learned counsel Mr. C.P. Soni and Manish Mathur & Ravi Mathur identified by learned counsel Mr. H.R. Soni with the prayer that the first appeal and cross-objection be dismissed as withdrawn. Additionally, an oral prayer has been made by Mr. H.R. Soni seeking withdrawal of the counter claim as filed in the suit.

¶50

In view of the overall developments and the applications as noticed herein-before, the applications seeking transposition filed under Order I, Rule 10(2) CPC and Order XXII, Rule 10 CPC by Manish Mathur & Ravi Mathur are allowed. They are permitted to be transposed as respondents in S.B. Civil First Appeal No.247/2014 and as appellants in S.B. Civil Cross Objection No.10/2014.

¶51

The amended cause title filed in both the matters are taken on record.

¶52

Office is directed to amend the online record in this regard.

¶53

The applications filed by learned counsel Mr. H.R. Soni seeking to drop his Vakalatnama for the parties other than Manish Mathur & Ravi Mathur are allowed. He is permitted to do so.

¶54

The compromise as filed by learned counsel for the parties, is taken on record. Based on the compromise as indicated in the application, the First Appeal as well as Cross Objection are dismissed as withdrawn. As per the oral prayer made by learned counsel Mr. H.R. Soni, counter claim as filed in the trial court and decreed is also permitted to be withdrawn, the same is also dismissed as withdrawn.

¶55

(ARUN BHANSALI),J

¶56

11&12-Rmathur/-

Prabhu Narayan v. Smt. Saroj and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prabhu Narayan v. Smt. Saroj and 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

State of Rajasthan Vs Asha

Mahendra Kumar and Ors. Vs Smt. Maya Devi and Ors.

Lali Vs Kanhaiya Lal and Anr.

Smt. Saroj and Ors. Vs Prabhu Narain Mathur and Anr.

Ram Pal and Ors. Vs Shivji Ram and Ors.

Singara Singh Vs Kashmir Kaur