Saroj D/O Ratiram W/O Satyapal Vs Savitri Wife of Krishan Kumar — Rajasthan HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Saroj D/O Ratiram W/O Satyapal Vs Savitri Wife of Krishan Kumar — Rajasthan HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge No.2, Behror to dispose of Temporary Injunction application No.46/14/2017 at earliest and preferably within a period of two months from the date of submitting the certified copy of the order; the stay application and pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Challenge to the ad-interim status quo order dated 02.01.2018 and its extension dated 04.07.2018 passed in the underlying suit (not ultimately adjudicated, as the petitioner confined the prayer). +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Taking into account the overall facts, and particularly that the Temporary Injunction application has been pending since 2017, the Court held that ends of justice would be met if the learned Court below were directed to dispose of the Temporary Injunction application on merits at earliest.

Key takeaways

The writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge No.2, Behror to dispose of Temporary Injunction application No.46/14/2017 at earliest, preferably within two months from the date of submitting the certified copy of this order.ratio¶¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Rajasthan High Court (Jaipur Bench), single Judge (Ganesh Ram Meena, J.), order dated 08/09/2025 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7952/2020 (Saroj v. Savitri, Girna & Sub-Registrar/Tehsildar, Madhan). The petitioner had challenged an ad-interim status quo order dated 02.01.2018 and its extension dated 04.07.2018 passed in a suit filed in 2017, but argued at length and then confined herself to a limited prayer that the Court below decide the pending Temporary Injunction application at earliest, it having remained undecided for over seven years. Holding that ends of justice would be met, the Court disposed of the writ petition, directing the Additional District & Sessions Judge No.2, Behror to dispose of Temporary Injunction application No.46/14/2017 on merits at earliest, preferably within two months of submission of the certified copy of the order; the stay application and pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. The validity of the interim orders themselves was not adjudicated. No statutes or precedents were cited and no quantum awarded.

[2025:RJ-JP:35818]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7952/2020

Saroj D/o Ratiram W/o Satyapal, Aged About 50 Years, R/o Village Bhungada, Tehsil Mundavar, District Alwar.

----Petitioner

Versus

Savitri Wife Of Krishan Kumar, Aged About 45 Years, R/o Village Mandan, Tehsil Neemrana, District Alwar.

Girna D/o Shri Ratiram Wife Of Ramotar, Aged About 56 Years, R/o Neemrana, District Alwar, At Present R/o Coginda, Tehsil Narnol, District Mahendragarh, Haryana.

----Respondents

Sub-Registrar/tehsildar, Madhan, Sub-Tehsil Madhan, Tehsil Madan, District Alwar, Rajasthan.

----Performa-Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rakesh Kumar with Ms. Priyanka Chauhan Ms. Nisha Jhaknariya

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA

Order

08/09/2025

This present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with a challenge to the order dated 02.01.2018 whereby, by adinterim order the parties were directed to maintain status-quo as regards the suit property and so also the order dated 04.07.2018 whereby, interim order dated 02.01.2018 was extended.

The petitioner has also prayed that the learned Court below be directed to decide the application of Temporary Injunction without any undue delay.

After arguing the matter at some length, counsel for the petitioner has made a limited prayer that the learned Court below

[2025:RJ-JP:35818]

[CW-7952/2020]

(2 of 3)

be directed to decide the Temporary Injunction application at earliest.

Considered the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner and perused the material made available on record.

The suit was filed in the year 2017 alongwith application of Temporary Injunction.

As per the order-sheet dated 02.01.2018, ad-interim order was passed whereby, learned Court below had directed both the parties to maintain status-quo as regards the suit property and vide order dated 04.07.2018 the interim order was extended and the matter was fixed for arguments on Temporary Injunction application on 24.07.2018.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Temporary Injunction application is pending for last more than 7 years and has not been decided so far.

Taking into consideration overall facts and circumstances of the case and more particularly the fact that Temporary Injunction application is pending for decision since 2017, this Court feels that ends of justice would meet if the learned Court below is directed to dispose of the Temporary Injunction application on merits at earliest.

Accordingly, the present writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge No.2, Behror to dispose of the Temporary Injunction application No.46/14/2017 at earliest and preferably within a period of two months from the date of submitting of the certified copy of this order.

[2025:RJ-JP:35818]

[CW-7952/2020]

(3 of 3)

Stay application as well as pending application, if any, also

stands disposed of.

(GANESH RAM MEENA),J

Ashish Kumar /20