Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
MADAN GOPAL VYAS, J.
Rekha D/o Shri Bhanwar Lal Mehta - Appellant
Versus
Balmukund S/o Shri Roop Lal Menariya - Respondent
S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 81 of 2021
Decided on : 13-09-2023
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 – Order 43, Rule 1(r) – Order 39, Rule 1 & 2 – Quashed and set aside – Arbitrary and perverse – Impugned order – Appellant submits hat order passed by learned Trial Court is arbitrary and perverse and deserves to be quashed and set aside – It is submitted that balance of convenience, irreparable loss and prima facie case lies in favor of appellant – Thus, it is prayed that impugned order may be quashed and set aside and application under Order 39, Rule 1 & 2 – Appeal disposed of.
JUDGMENT :
The appeal under Order 43, Rule 1(r), CPC is directed against the order dated 27.11.2020 passed by the learned Additional District Judge No. 1, Chittorgarh (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, CPC.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits hat 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 balance of convenience, irreparable loss and prima facie case lies 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.
3. 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.
4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
5. A perusal of the material available on record makes it clear that the original suit itself is pending consideration before the learned Trial court since the year 2012.
6. 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.
7. Till then, both the parties are directed to maintain the status quo, as it exists today, with regard to the property in dispute.
8. A copy of this order be sent to learned Trial Court through Email or Fax.
The court established that maintaining the status-quo is essential in injunction cases to prevent irreparable harm while ensuring compliance with prior judgments.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that appeal is a statutory right and must be explicitly provided for in a statute. The judgment also emphasizes the principles governing a suit und....
Trial court should not be influenced by observations in impugned order while deciding application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2, CPC
A person claiming independent right, title or interest in the property can resist delivery of possession even by filing an objection under Order 21 Rule 97 CPC in the executing court itself and if th....
The appeal filed under Order 43 Rule 1 does not countenance an appeal against the Order passed under Order 37 Rule 4 of CPC.
The appellate court has the discretion to remand a case for a fresh trial when new evidence is introduced, ensuring fairness in the judicial process.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
