Allowed

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

Rajasthan HC12 Feb 2021CFA/247/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed applications for the transposition of Manish Mathur and Ravi Mathur as respondents in the appeal and appellants in the cross-objection. A compromise was filed and recorded, leading to the dismissal of the appeal and cross-objection as withdrawn, along with the withdrawal of a counter-claim.

What did the court decide?

Applications seeking transposition under Order I, Rule 10 and Order XXII, Rule 4 CPC allowed. First appeal and cross-objection dismissed as withdrawn. Counter-claim permitted to be withdrawn.

Smt. Saroj and Ors. Vs Prabhu Narain Mathur… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

¶2

JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 24712014

¶4

Smt. Saroj wife of Late Shri Kailash Narayan Ji,

¶5

Resident of 4-F-60, New Power House Road, Jodhpur. 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. Smt. Nitila Mathur wjfeiq i ; : -,, R$unak,D/o Late Shri Kailash ' *

¶7

Narayan Ji, R/o 25, Gavafri hag%;, :P.al+Balaji, Jodhpur.

¶8

Smt. Antim"a ~athur wife of Pankaj RO&/U Late Shri Kailash Naraya.n.Ji, R/o Badlon Ka Chowk, Jodhpur. 9;;"-'

¶9

*? ..- .,

¶10

'%. ''41.

¶11

----pellants

¶12

Versus s .. '

¶13

Lrs of Prabhu Narayan :i-:' >a$ , I' * "^.a

¶14

1/1. Manish afliu+6"n'1'dfka'e~~ala,.sh a~i y+&,edd _',.?_ ., Narayan, frr* q.+, ,-*,< .. - 9 & ,. 4

¶15

1. Ravi aturso,?cofL&.-~aas.hiaraan, -; .;d, >2e 4 - XI . 5%i . + i &

¶16

. +< . .,t:$dY

¶17

Residents of 4-F-:6O ,.,., TI N,e~~iRoweiHbc1se i.,*, . J- p+r. ,-<crq .+' Road, Jodhpur. 1, 1 b _?lyr.;":;.;$3;,t5:;_

¶18

$. "i;.$".d>~ "h i ?C. y ; $ .'.?(;i.i, " r .,& 4% &,$. .\aMJ.'hi

¶19

Assistant Enginee;:;F-II.;MedicaII,~~ollege, Jodhpur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Limite!, j;odlpyr: >, 4'1'. _,SP,,_ ,.a! ,'?:".;:* i A* ' *I 'li i;

¶20

4, ti ;i i; &i: ----Respondents "g (i: :

¶21

bo*iiliected dith

¶22

'Is.$ .P,. .?;'.Q,Jy.;? i^ . '* '. h . i '

¶23

S.B. Ci~~~~i,~~~~j;.f~~~:AppPPpNo,l0/2O~~ I$: ' >A J: .%>a . * \

¶24

4 7 4 !* 1 i

¶25

Lrs of Pra bhu ~;;"aanl.::?il , .i ' - - c ,,., .,,"..y':.*.--^,A." .. < '&

¶26

1. Manish awr-.sodfi~~a&:.ailash b,8.ixbk*.b,dzL-;,wa Narayan, 112. Ravi Mathur son of Late Kailash Narayan, 9,: ..T...h..* , .--I>-'.

¶27

Residents of 4-~~60-!e$c@owerbose % I .* Road, Jodhpur.

¶28

----Appellant

¶29

Versus

¶30

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

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

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

¶34

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

¶35

6. Assistant Engineer, B-111, Medical College, Jodhpur Vidhyut Vitran Nigam Limited, Jodhpur.

----Respondents

For Appellant(s)

For Respondent(s)

: Mr. C.P. Soni - in Appeal No.24712014. Mr. H.R. Soni-in Cross Obj. No.10/2014.

¶40

: Mr. Mahesh Joshi.

¶41

" ... . - .. cI, i 3 !T .t HON'BLE #.," ~~M.R.'"-J.USTICEA~U~~~ i ='- .BHANSALI P"". :$, B Order^-Lfi^Ci,$ +-q p. *. k +*r- 12/02/202a Y%b.'*,~ : >:.d2 Y- . ,, 4 * .' ,/. .i;4

¶42

S:B?.. it.. Civil First Appeal No.24712014 was filed by'app.ellants - Smt. Saroj, Manish Mathur, Ravi, Smt. Kiran, Smt. Suman, Smt. #,. jq fJI',,", '^ .p NitiIa Mathur and rnt?<Antlrna$$~atltl"u~& PI cg _.,:_ i,.., **_.db,..':,_** it-*&% c8.z%. L%e: -4 -. --. against respondent - ; -. .i : $.>:f;:.y3.fg g" r". , ; ? tr -j . . a. ,I , , : I Prabhu Narayan Mathuy&"-Asssbant- 1 % ..... ) ...( Engineer, .- t JVVNLi Jodhpur "a:&:$.$. & 2';;; it .i. i""',", aggrieved against theT)$dtjti.e*'fif-=.,:&~ ,&.r,lp desree dated 22.01.2013 4 a;, . . >:*p $2 ,, -i. . . .& ?4 ;%,:4>.FLs? passed by the ~dditiona~~~:jsbr:i;k@%~dp,e:~~o.l, -9 re:+@p a:. ii p Jodhpur Metro in 1' -3. fl pi$ tg \y Civil Original Suit 0.3/f&,[wereb J , the suit filed by the $ Etf $ ~3 >+& fi f $1, . f %,i t i appellants was rejected an'dico'untef?~lai,'m ., c: ,?. A%-2 filed by Prabhu Narayan *; :.: t.2.1 " <<:$,.p$ :y:<. *" Mathur was allowed. tqc1f 1: ; a -... { ,.1,: .-:" **b.,** * - : ..?.r;*q+ --. **-h~,** _ijj_ 3 ' !.;* *, _L 7'_ , $ ;; ., *- " **"",d** "P The respondent RrabhuiNa~aya-svku A ; .' - **.** n~Mathur ..,: . _y_ filed cross-objection '&&~:+:gz~>:,:.,Ty;3#' under Order XLI, Rule 22 r"-T" CPC . p 7, " l z '3 wz;, b q 2 eing_S:B. Civil Cross Objection . .& * 9.. --i ,b". 8- ?!-""j No.10/2014 against the appellants as welras A.En., JVVNL.

¶43

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.

¶44

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

¶45

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

¶46

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

¶47

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

¶48

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, \i"'j .$ ?. ,.. $ F.,?-* seeking impleadment;,./. tt.ans 'ostdn: bnder,Order I, Rule lO(2) f" , * 3.4 . p -- 9 -> , :; #i ,pp.-'., CPC & ~rder,j(I., ^~ule 10 CPC, as responden$s;in the appeal '" + . ..,:.@ 6 8 based on'~the'wil1 said to have been executed by PI%~~,u Narayan U, .r;:p& <J.** Y i., Mathur. '** ,.#

¶49

Another application hay::tS"e6-&~filed . ***.** by learned counsel Mr. . *-" " . Cli H.R. Soni to drop his Va kalatnarna for Mathur & Ravi Mathur - original

¶50

Similarly, have been filed $ $g, ,i 4 under Order I, Rule 10(2),C~:$ an! rder 111, uie 4 CPC, wherein d 9; , $+rei, ,st- . ' . , 2. I **ZYL: i)** ._ said Manish Mathur &~~aavi''Math'.ut:a'd: s$ 7...-+ep :.-%&s -as-* .' i??' sought transposition / ".".'. -; !, ,, **v. rt.** * %..' :I.! . irnpleadment as appellants I? ,.a. -,, adl;ai-ed"co:nsel ...* :i b ' Mr. H.R. Soni has G" > ei+,!&&* . >- ti 5P + ,."... :.." ,.&.-;r'; ;"l--. sought dropping of his Vakalatnama - **L..** 2 'fo"? the respondents in the cross-objection other t~"fi.-:5a"ia'",n'i'~hdihur ,, +*, ..p-i%-I.l Ba3(xi Os,,, & Ravi Mathur. . * Simultaneously, learned counsel Mr. C.P. Soni has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of all the appellants in S.B. Civil First Appeal No.24712014 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.

¶51

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

¶52

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.

¶53

In view of the overall developments and the, applications as I noticed herein-before, the applications seeking P - transposition filed R $tS I under Order I, Rule 10(2$ C-PC3 aid o~~$~~xxII, Rule 10 CPC by * % d Manish Mathur & Ravi Mathur are allowed. They are permitted to *e *1 - be transposed as respondents in S.B. Civil - First Appeal V , 92 1 No.247/2014 and as appellants in S.B. Civil ,Cross "0.bjection

¶54

s ' .,, ,-. 'y<3s: ?' - ?. , .;,!,,:: "=Pi, The amended ca65&jtile.fi'led::rn:,.bpfih;'the .;,,l: .;.r 2,: 4 ..+ ". .--, ep$ss matters are taken ".',3& k;,t"rrs F. $$ &,/? ,::,"I " ".?%k" '; * on record. v %J<&rh., i.. $';$.?&.! .?+$ * %j. r, j ,? sz;:, J: x ;%"&* 9 ,t,,%&'. .+ &: ' %tp;3,;$Ja .$.:.<*t?%$~!?*%*~ $i?*k, x=&*=iV) $.:qi-", ." $f:+2 Office is directed t~!a~e~d-Ith,e.on'l~~~jrecord r.21wlq44c4:i. **.-,.,l.,** .. .r ;. J_ in this regard. $,i$l*-3,$7%$s $5 " : *.,- **_a>-'>* ,. .,, '#;!'+{ :,$; I The applications fled ,i.'by$ear,ned counsel Mr. H.R. Soni 1 $j $$ {i jj j/ seeking to drop his Vaka1atna.p foriithe parties other than Manish $% 1.. b, jjj .p ff .- $;-$a. n;& d?k .a, Mathur & Ravi Mathur a.e+$llowed. _".;.b,.%;bc-L:v;ykg..i"r.._ Hieosppermitted to do so. $I.: "$it>! ,?t$;; % ,-<ti,. nk: "i $ ,,, . :. j 14! The compromise.';as filed; bp Iiea'rned: 'counsel for the parties, r 4" ' $A .J&. $"B*7:-..%'. "' + & ., --., iy;;; &-, A. * :*q-:d$,+ L -y is taken on record. Baed~&q~~tgg~~~romise as indicated in the -. .4 application, the First a n, ,it -2.;: c .,,, wells Cross Objection are i ,&% 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

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

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.

Prabhu Narayan Vs Smt. Saroj and Ors.

Ram Pal and Ors. Vs Shivji Ram and Ors.

Singara Singh Vs Kashmir Kaur