Allowed

Srilal Son of Bhagwat v. Smt. Bhaggo Wife of Shri Pyaray

Rajasthan HC24 Aug 2021CW/1337/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge bench allowed a writ petition challenging an order allowing a document to be placed on record. The court quashed the order as it failed to consider a subsequent revision that set aside the underlying attachment proceedings, rendering the document redundant. Civil proceedings were directed to continue.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 21.12.2018 allowing the document to be placed on record is quashed and set aside. Civil proceedings to continue in the trial court.

Srilal Son of Bhagwat Vs Smt. Bhaggo Wife… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

(1 of 4)

¶2

[CW-1337/2019]

¶3

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶4

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1337/2019

¶5

Srilal Son Of Bhagwat, Aged About 56 Years, Resident Of Village Bhagora, Tehsil Weir, District Bharatpur (Rajasthan).

¶6

Rama Son Of Bhagwat, Resident Of Village Bhagora, Tehsil Weir, District Bharatpur (Rajasthan).

¶7

Smt. Anja Wife Of Niranjan, Aged About 40 Years, Resident Of Village Bhagora, Tehsil Weir, District Bharatpur (Rajasthan).

¶8

Smt. Sanjey Wife Of Bharto, Aged About 35 Years, Resident Of Village Bhagora, Tehsil Weir, District Bharatpur (Rajasthan).

¶9

----Petitioners

¶10

Versus

¶11

Smt. Bhaggo Wife Of Shri Pyaray, Resident Of Village Bhagora, Tehsil Weir, District Bharatpur (Rajasthan).

¶12

Bhagwat Son Of Sarman, Resident Of Village Bhagora, Tehsil Weir, District Bharatpur (Rajasthan). (Since Deceased)

¶13

Kallo Wife Of Ram Singh, Resident Of Village Bhagora, Tehsil Weir, District Bharatpur (Rajasthan).

¶14

Radha Wife Of Ratti, Resident Of Village Dhudheri, Tehsil Bayana, District Bharatpur (Rajasthan).

¶15

Keshi Wife Of Batto, Resident Of Village Dhudheri, Tehsil Bayana, District Bharatpur (Rajasthan).

¶16

----Respondents

¶17

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajneesh Gupta For Respondent(s) : Mr. Dinesh Yadav

¶18

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA Order

¶19

24/08/2021

¶20

The petitioner has assailed the order of learned Additional District Judge dated 21.12.2018 whereby the application moved

¶21

(2 of 4) [CW-1337/2019]

¶22

under Order 7 Rule 14 (3) of CPC filed by the plaintiff-

¶23

respondent/s was allowed. At this stage, the case was listed for final arguments.

¶24

Learned counsel submits that by the said application, the respondent/s sought to bring on record an order passed by the Tehsildar dated 10.01.2012 directing for attachment of the property in terms of the order passed by S.D.O. dated 29.12.2011.

¶25

Learned counsel submits that the entire attachment of property was initially on account of an order passed by the trial Court dated 23.12.2011. Against which, a revision was filed and the learned Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Bayana, Bharatupur vide judgment dated 31.01.2017 set aside the order dated 23.12.2011 and remanded the matter back to the trial Court for rehearing of the case and therefore, the purpose of placing the said attachment proceedings dated 10.01.2012 was redundant. Learned counsel submits that even otherwise at this stage when the case is to be finally argued, there was no occasion for the respondent/s to move an application under Order 7 Rule 14 (3) CPC especially when the order dated 10.01.2012 was very much in the knowledge since 2012. The case has proceeded and evidence has already been recorded.

¶26

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the order passed by the Tehsildar dated 10.01.2012 ought to be taken into consideration for disposal of the case, no evidence is required to be laid and therefore prejudice would be caused by directing the document to be placed on record and therefore, order passed by the trial Court does not warrant any interference.

¶27

(3 of 4)

¶28

[CW-1337/2019]

¶29

Learned counsel further submits that the order passed in revision and placed before this Court, Smt. Anja Vs. State, has no relation with the order dated 10.01.2012.

¶30

I have considered the submissions.

¶31

Perusal of the order dated 31.01.2017 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge No.2 Bayana, Bharatpur shows that the learned Judge has set aside the order dated 23.12.2011 by which the property was taken over and the attachment proceedings were directed to be initiated. The Court has also observed that attachment proceedings were unjustified as no hearing was given to the consent parties. The parties in the said order of revision are the same as before the Tehsildar in the order dated 10.01.2012 which is a consequential order.

¶32

Keeping in view of above aspects and taking into consideration that order dated 10.01.2012 and attachment order passed in pursuance of the earlier order dated 23.12.2011 which has already been set aside by the learned Additional District Judge on 31.01.2017. No purpose would be served in taking the document on record.

¶33

Keeping in view thereof, this Court is of the firm view that the order dated 23.01.2018 whereby an application under Order 7 Rule 14 (3) CPC was allowed, is not based on merits and no reason has been assigned. The Court has failed to notice that the order dated 31.01.2017 passed in revision by the Court of ADJ to set aside the attachment proceedings. In view thereof, the order dated 21.12.2018 deserves to be quashed and set aside.

¶34

The writ petition is accordingly allowed and the proceedings shall now continue in the trial Court.

¶35

(4 of 4)

¶36

[CW-1337/2019]

¶37

All pending applications also stands disposed of.

¶38

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J

¶39

TN/28

Srilal Son of Bhagwat v. Smt. Bhaggo Wife of Shri Pyaray

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Srilal Son of Bhagwat v. Smt. Bhaggo Wife of Shri Pyaray

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

Smt Rameshwari Devi Widow of Shri Brijniwasdas Ji (Since Deceased) Vs Krishna Kumar Sharma S/O Brijniwasdas Ji

Munendra Singh S/O Shri Dhroov Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Gauri Vs Anju Singh

Smt. Barji Devi W/O Gopal Saini D/O Prabhatilal Vs Prabhatilal S/O Ghisa

Radhey Shyam and Ors. Vs District Collector and Ors.

Sitaram Sharma, Son of Late Shri Kanhaiya Lal Ji Joshi Vs District Collector