Partly allowed

Kamal Kishore Saraf v. Raja Ram Saraf

Rajasthan HC22 Sept 2023CMA/2797/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an appeal against dismissal of a temporary injunction application in a pending partition suit, the High Court remanded the matter directing the Trial Court to decide the original suit within one year, while keeping an earlier interim order in force.

What did the court decide?

The Trial Court directed to decide the civil original suit within one year. The interim order dated 21.10.2019 remains in force.

Kamal Kishore Saraf Vs Raja Ram Saraf — Partition | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023:RJ-JD:31510]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 2797/2019

¶4

Kamal Kishore Saraf S/o Shri Rameshwar Das, Aged About 52 Years, R/o Station Road, Barmer (Raj.)

¶5

----Appellant

¶6

Versus

¶7

Raja Ram Saraf S/o Shri Rameshwar Das, R/o Station Road, Barmer (Raj.)

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Appellant(s)	: Mr.	Narendra Thanvi
For Respondent(s)	: Mr.	DK Gaur

¶10

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN GOPAL VYAS

¶11

Judgment

¶12

22/09/2023

¶13

The appeal under Order 43, Rule 1(r), CPC is directed against the order dated 29.08.2019 passed by the learned Additional District Judge No. 1, Barmer (hereinafter referred to as the learned Trial Court) whereby the learned Trial Court dismissed the application of the appellant-plaintiff under Order 39, Rule 1 & 2 read with Section 151 of CPC in thesuit for partition and permanent injunction.

¶14

Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the order passed by the learned Trial Court is arbitrary and perverse and deserves to be quashed and set aside. It is submitted that the impugned order is a non-speaking order. It is submitted that the balance of convenience, irreparable loss and prima facie case lie in favor of appellant. Thus, it is prayed that the impugned order may be quashed and set aside and the application under Order 39, Rule 1 & 2 may be allowed with costs.

[2023:RJ-JD:31510]

[CMA-2797/2019]

(2 of 2)

Learned counsel for the respondent objects to the prayer made by the learned counsel for the appellant and submits that the impugned order is well reasoned and calls for no interference.

¶19

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

¶20

A perusal of the material available on record makes it clear that the original suit for partition and permanent injunction itself is pending consideration before the learned Trial court since the year 2017.

¶21

Therefore, the present appeal is disposed of with a direction to the learned Trial Court to decide the civil original suit itself within a period of one year from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order instant.

¶22

Till then, the interim order dated 21.10.2019 passed by coordinate Bench of this Court shall remain in currency.

¶23

A copy of this order be sent to learned Trial Court through Email or Fax.

¶24

(MADAN GOPAL VYAS),J

¶25

125-CPGoyal/-

Kamal Kishore Saraf v. Raja Ram Saraf

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamal Kishore Saraf v. Raja Ram Saraf

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

Amba Lal and Ors. Vs Nand Lal and Ors.

Anjali Mehta Vs Siddarth Jain

Vasim Vs State of Rajasthan

Surajbhan Yadav and Anr. Vs Smt. Rajkanwar and Ors.

Ikbal Khan Vs State of Rajasthan

Hoshiyar Singh Vs Rajendra Kumar