The High Court dismissed this second appeal alleging no substantial question of law. The suit challenging possession was dismissed below due to unregistered mortgage deed and unproved sale deed. The court noted significant procedural delay spanning 17 years.
The second appeal is dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 566/2017
Ridha Karan son of Shri Lal Chand Lakhara, aged about 42 years Resident of Roopangarh, Tehsil Kishangarh, District Ajmer
----Appellant/Plaintiff
Versus
All resident of Civil Lines Colony, Ajmer quarter No.29.
----Respondents/Defendants
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Hari Barath For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Judgment
15/11/2022
(2 of 2)
[CSA-566/2017]
decree dated 06.12.1993 passed in Civil Suit No.229/1993 by the Court of Additional Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Kishangarh, Ajmer, whereby and whereunder civil suit filed by appellantplaintiff has been dismissed on merits.
(SUDESH BANSAL),J
SACHIN/87
2 issues framed by the court
Whether any substantial question of law arises from the dismissal of the suit on facts regarding possession and mortgage deed.
Whether the delay of 17 years in prosecuting the second appeal warrants dismissal.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ridha Karan
Om Prakash
Smt. Teeja
Lal Chand Khati
Poonam Chand
Shanti Lal
Sudes Bansal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
