##PAGE1##

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Civ. Contempt Pet. No. 16/2021 CNR: RJHC010107182021 | URN: CCP / 227U / 2021

1. Devendra S/o Late Ramrakh Bohra, Aged About 69 Years, R/o Ummedpura, Phalodi Hall, Local Residence At Phophalia Bhawan, Sardarpura Ist B Road, Jodhpur

2. Sri Kishan S/o Late Ramrakh Bohra, Aged About 63 Years, Ummedpura, Phalodi Hall, Local Residence At Phophalia Bhawan, Sardarpura Ist B Road, Jodhpur

3. Kamal Kishore S/o Laxmi Narain, Aged About 48 Years, R/o Ummedpura, Phalodi Hall, Local Residence At Phophalia Bhawan, Sardarpura Ist B Road, Jodhpur ----Petitioners Versus

1. Lrs Of Magni, Ramchandaniyo Ki Gali, Near Satyanarayan Temple, Phalodi, Dis. Jodhpur

2. Kanwar Lal S/o Late Kishan Lal Purohit, Ramchandaniyo Ki Gali, Near Satyanarayan Temple, Phalodi, Dis. Jodhpur

3. Bhanwar Lal Purohit S/o Late Kishan Gopal Purohit, Ramchandaniyo Ki Gali, Near Satyanarayan Temple, Phalodi, Dis. Jodhpur

4. Magan Lal Purohit S/o Late Kishan Gopal Purohit, Ramchandaniyo Ki Gali, Near Satyanarayan Temple, Phalodi, Dis. Jodhpur

5. Deendayal Purohit S/o Late Kishan Gopal Purohit, Ramchandaniyo Ki Gali, Near Satyanarayan Temple, Phalodi, Dis. Jodhpur

6. Radheshyam Purohit S/o Late Kishan Gopal Purohit, Ramchandaniyo Ki Gali, Near Satyanarayan Temple, Phalodi, Dis. Jodhpur

7. Saraswati Thanvi D/o Late Kishan Lal Purohit, Ramchandaniyo Ki Gali, Near Satyanarayan Temple, Phalodi, Dis. Jodhpur

8. Godavari Thanvi D/o Late Kishan Lal Purohit, Ramchandaniyo Ki Gali, Near Satyanarayan Temple, Phalodi, Dis. Jodhpur

9. Shanti Devi D/o Late Kishan Lal Purohit, Ramchandaniyo Ki Gali, Near Satyanarayan Temple, Phalodi, Dis. Jodhpur ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Prashant Tatia For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mahendra Thanvi HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP SHAH

Order

04/11/2026

1. The present contempt petition has been filed alleging deliberate and wilful disobedience of the order dated 29.11.1999 passed by this Court in S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 360/1999, whereby, after hearing learned counsel for the parties, they were directed to maintain status quo with respect to the property in question. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the aforesaid interim order continues to remain in force and the second appeal is still pending adjudication. Learned counsel further submits that notwithstanding the subsistence of the said order, the respondents proceeded to raise construction over the plot in question. In support of the allegations, learned counsel has drawn the attention of this Court to the photographs available at page 14 of the paper book, wherein in the first photograph the vacant plot and the thatched sheds and in the second photograph the construction undertaken by the respondents is clearly visible. He, thus submits that the respondents have deliberately and wilfully violated the order passed by this Court and deserve to be punished appropriately.

2. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that a room was already in existence at the site, which, with the passage of time, had been in a dilapidated condition and was on the verge of collapse. He further submits that the work undertaken was merely repair and renovation of the existing structure and was carried out bonafidely, without any intention to violate the interim order passed by this Court. He further submits that since no effective proceedings had taken place in the second appeal prior to the year 2020, the respondents could not remain in regular touch with their counsel. Learned counsel for the respondents, therefore, pray that the alleged violation may be viewed leniently.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

4. In paragraph 8 of the reply to the contempt petition, the respondents have stated as under:

“8. That the contents of para no. 8 the manner in which have been stated are strongly denied. The petitioners have stated herein that they visited the suit propert