SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2016 Supreme(Raj) 917

IN THE HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Deepak Maheshwari, J.
Gulab Chand - Petitioner
Versus
Madhu Das & Ors. - Respondents
Civil 2nd Stay Petition No. 1516 of 2016 in S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 122 of 2014
Decided On : 30-08-2016

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Dhanesh Saraswat and Mr. Navneet Singh Advocate.
For the Respondents:Mr. Ashwini K. Babel, Advocate.

Headnote:

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 – Parties and perused the relevant documents – Learned counsel for the respondents has furnished the copy of the judgment passed by this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition titled as " whereby, the writ petition filed by the appellant has been dismissed – Appellant has sought the relief by way of this writ petition to restrain the concerned authority from making entry in respect of mutation in favour of the respondents, who are respondents herein also – Held, Learned trial Court in the impugned judgment regarding possession over the disputed land as also taking this fact into consideration that the same relief had been claimed by the appellant by way of first stay petition which was not granted by this Court while admitting this appeal vide order, this Court is not inclined to grant the relief as prayed for regarding status-quo in respect of possession over the land in dispute – Petition is dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

Deepak Maheshwari, J.

Heard the learned counsels for both the parties and perused the relevant documents as also the impugned judgment dated 11th March, 2014.

2. The learned counsel for the respondents has furnished the copy of the judgment dated 19th March, 2013 passed by this Court in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2988/2011 titled as "Gulab Chand v. Madhu Das & Ors." whereby, the writ petition filed by the appellant has been dismissed. The appellant has sought the relief by way of this writ petition to restrain the concerned authority from making entry in respect of mutation in favour of the respondents No. 2 and 3, who are respondents herein also. In view of the judgment dated 19th March, 2013, the prayer of the appellant/applicant is found devoid of merit and is liable to be rejected.

3. By way of this second stay petition, the appellant has prayed to maintain the status-quo with regard to possession over the land in dispute but in view of the findings given by the learned trial Court in the impugned judgment dated 11th March, 2014 regarding possession over the disputed land as also taking this fact into consideration that the same relief had been claimed by the appellant by way of first stay petition which was not granted by this Court while admitting this appeal vide order dated 19th May, 2014, this Court is not inclined to grant the relief as prayed for regarding status-quo in respect of possession over the land in dispute. Hence, the present second stay petition is dismissed and disposed of accordingly.


Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top