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

2025 Supreme(RAJ) 741

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA, J
CHOTELAL AND ORS – Appellant
Versus
ADDI DISTRICT JUDGE F T AND – Respondent


Advocates:
Mr. Jai Sharma, Adv. & Mr. Tanmay Dhand, Adv.

Order :

 1. This civil writ petition has been filed by the petitioners-plaintiffs (for short 'the plaintiffs') against the orders dated 10.11.2004 and 14.12.2007 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.2, Sikar by which the said court dismissed the applications filed by the plaintiffs.

2. Learned counsel for the plaintiffs submits that the plaintiffs filed a suit against the respondents-defendants (for short 'the defendants') for partition, declaration and permanent injunction in which plaintiffs filed an application under Order 7 Rule 14(3) CPC, which was partly disallowed by the trial court vide its order dated 10.11.2004. The plaintiffs filed another application under Section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act for leading the secondary evidence in relation to the said documents but the same has also been dismissed by the trial court vide order dated 14.12.2007.

3. Learned counsel for the plaintiffs further submits that Harphool Singh used to sign in English and not in Hindi. So, secondary evidence was required to be led in respect of those documents but trial court vide its order dated 14.12.2007 wrongly dismissed the application filed by the plaintiffs, hence t

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top