Advocates:
['BAL RAM VASHISTH', 'AJAY GUPTA', '', 'O P MISHRA', 'K N SHARMA', 'AJAY SHUKLA', 'ARPIT BAHETI', 'RAKESH CHNADEL', 'ANKIT JAISWAL']

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 53/2020

Yashoda Devi W/o Shivman Kradiya D/o Lt. Revad Mal, Resident

Of House No. 4379, Topkhane Ka Rasta, Chandpole Bazar, Jaipur

----Appellant/Plaintiff

Versus

1.

Khem Chand Raigar S/o Lt Revad Mal, Resident Of House

No. 613, Lane No. 10, Rishi Galav Nagar, Galta Gate,

Jaipur

2.

Babu Lal Raigar S/o Lt Revad Mal, Resident Of House No.

613, Lane No. 10, Rishi Galav Nagar, Galta Gate, Jaipur

3.

Meena Devi W/o Tarachand Kradiya, Resident Of House

No. 3375, Raigaro Ki Kothi, Raigaro Ka Mohalla, Ghatgate,

Jaipur

4.

United Bank Of India Through Branch Manager, M.B.

Tower, Near Om Tower, In Front Of Amrapura, M.I. Road,

Jaipur

5.

Allahabad Bank Through Branch Manager, Jaipur Mansion

Paanch Batti, M.I. Road, Jaipur

6.

State Bank Of India Through Branch Manager, SMS

Highway, Chauda Rasta, Post Box No. 94, Jaipur

----Respondents/Defendants

For Appellant(s)

:

Mr. Devendra Sharma through VC

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. Ankit Jaiswal with

Mr. O.P. Mishra,

Mr. Ajay Shukla and

Mr. Rakesh Chandel

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOVERDHAN BARDHAR

Order

20/07/2021

Challenge in the instant civil misc. appeal filed by the

appellant/plaintiff under Order 43 Rule 1 (R) of the CPC has been

made against the order dated 04.12.2019 passed by the Court of

(2 of 2)

[CMA-53/2020]

Additional District and Sessions Judge No.1, Jaipur Metropolitan in

temporary injunction application No. 80/2019 (842/2019) whereby

the application filed by the plaintiff under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2

read with Section 151 CPC was partly allowed.

Learned counsel for the appellant has placed reliance

on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court passed in Ram

Chander Talwar & Anr vs Devender Kumar Talwar & Ors, reported

in 2010 Vol 10 SCC 671.

Heard learned counsel appearing for both the parties

and perused the impugned order dated 04.12.2019 passed by the

Court below.

I do not find any ground to interfere in the impugned

order.

However, taking note of the overall facts and

circumstances of the case as also looking to the nature of the

litigation, the trial Court is directed to decide the main suit

expeditiously preferably within a period of six months from the

date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

However, the respondents No. 4 to 6 are directed to

place the FDR in question in the same mode and shall ensure

renewal of the same in every six months till disposal of the main

suit.

The instant civil misc. appeal is accordingly disposed of.

(GOVERDHAN BARDHAR),J

Ritu/40