Back
2025 Supreme(RAJ) 1077
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
Mr. Justice Narendra Singh Dhaddha, J
MANOJ DUBEY S/O LATE SHRI AWDESH CHAND – Appellant
Versus
SMT. NIRMALA DUBEY W/O LATE SHRI ANAND SWAROOP DUBEY – Respondent
CW / 3531 / 2020
Important Points
Subject
Civil Law - Partition and Suits
Act Referred
Headnote
(B) Civil Suit - The court emphasized that the trial court's decision to frame additional issues was appropriate and necessary for the proper adjudication of the suit. (Paras 2-5)
Facts of the case:
The petition was filed by defendant No.5 against the trial court's order dated 27.01.2020, which partially dismissed his application for additional issues in a partition suit filed by the plaintiffs. (Paras 1-3)
Findings of Court:
The court upheld the trial court's decision, stating that the additional issues were appropriately framed and necessary for the case's adjudication. (Paras 5)
Issues: The main issue was whether the trial court erred in not framing additional issues regarding valuation, cancellation of Will, and specific relief. (Paras 3-4)
Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that the trial court had adequately framed the necessary additional issues for the adjudication of the suit, rendering the petition without merit. (Paras 5)
Result: Petition dismissed.
Mr. Akash Gupta, Adv. on behalf of Mr. B. L. Agarwal, Adv.
Order :
1. This Civil Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner-defendant No.5 (for short 'the defendant No.5') against the order dated 27.01.2020 passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge No.7, Jaipur Metropolitan in Civil Suit No.19/2013, whereby application under Order 14 Rule 5 read with Section 151 CPC filed by the defendant No.5 has been partly dismissed.
2. Learned counsel for the defendant No.5 submits that respondent Nos.1 to 4-plaintiffs (for short 'the plaintiffs') filed a suit against the defendants for partition in which defendant No.5 filed an application under Order 14 Rule 5 read with Section 151 CPC for framing of the additional issues but trial court vide order dated 27.01.2020 partly dismissed the application filed by the defendant No.5.
3. Learned counsel for the defendant No.5 also submits that trial court had committed error in not framing the additional issues regarding valuation, cancellation of Will and specific relief. So, order dated 27.01.2020 passed by the trial court be set aside and trial court be directed to frame the additional issues as per application filed by the defendant No.5.
4. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the defendant No.5 and perused the impugned order.
5. A perusal of order dated 27.01.2020 passed by the trial court reveals that trial court while partly dismissed the application filed by the defendant No.5. So, in my considered opinion, trial court had framed the additional issues which were necessary for adjudication of the suit. So, the present petition being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed, which stands dismissed accordingly.
6. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) dismissed.
