HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Transfer Application No. 75/2022

Meeta Agarwal D/o Shri Meenalal Agarwal W/o Shri Manoj Kumar

Agarwal, R/o Plot No. 2, Sector-3, Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur

Through Power Of Attorney Holder Father Meenalal Agarwal,

Aged About 75 Years, R/o House No. 3, Kalon Ka Mohalla, K.g.b.

Ka Rasta, Johari Bazar, Jaipur-302003

----Applicant/Plaintiff

Versus

1.

Hathroigari Grah Nirman Sehkari Samiti, D-20

Meeramarg, Banipark, Jaipur Through Shri Rampratap

Son Of Shri Jagdish Prasad Sen,

2.

Kajod Singh Son Of Umed Singh, R/o Arjun Nagar,

Durgapura, Jaipur.

3.

Assistant Engineer, Rajasthan State Vidhyut Nigam,

Mansarovar Jaipur.

4.

Rajmata Gayatri Devi (Deceased) W/o Late Shri Mansingh

Ji, R/o Lillypool, Tonk Road, C-Scheme, Jaipur.

5.

Mitra Grah Nirman Sehakari Samiti Jaipur., Through

President And Investment Near Kishore Mistan Bhandar

Police Staiton Sodala, Jaipur

6.

Jaipur Development Authority Through Secretary, J.d.a

Circle Jawaharlal Nehru Marg, Jaipur A-4, Sms Colony, B-

Block, Durgapura, Maharani Farm Mansarovar Jaipur.

7.

Dependra Singh @ Banna S/o Shri Bacchan Singh, R/o 4-

A, SMS Colony, B-Block, Durgapura, Maharani Farm,

Above Mansarovar Nalah, Banethi House, Opposite

Singhvi Marble, Jaipur.

----Respondents/Defendants

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. Sampat Lal Songara

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. Bajrang Lal Choudhary for

respondent No.2

Mr. Pawan Sharma on behalf of

Ms. Neelam Sharma for respondent

No.3

Mr. Manvendra Singh for respondent

No.6

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL

Order

13/10/2022

REPORTABLE

1.

The instant transfer application under Section 24 of the Code

of Civil Procedure, has been filed seeking transfer of Civil Suit

(2 of 9)

[CTA-75/2022]

No.56/2020 (464/2012) (26/2014), pending before the Court of

Additional District Judge No.9, Jaipur Metropolitan II, Jaipur to any

other court of equivalent jurisdiction, within the province of Jaipur

Metropolitan II, Jaipur.

2.

Applicant-plaintiff has stated that the present civil suit for

declaration, possession, damages, mandatory and permanent

injunction, was instituted way back in the year 2008 and wherein

after filing the written statement by contesting defendants and

framing of issues, both parties have adduced their complete

evidence and suit reached at the stage of final hearing. At this

stage, the Presiding Officer, instead of hearing and decide the suit

on merits, opined that according to valuation of suit, same should

be referred to civil court having lower pecuniary jurisdiction and

asked the plaintiff to move an application for this purpose. When

plaintiff denied to move such an application, the Presiding Officer

asked the contesting defendant No.2 to move such application.

Defendant No.2, thereafter, filed application on 10.08.2021

praying that the Court of Additional District Judge has no

pecuniary jurisdiction to hear and decide the present suit. It may

be noticed that such objection was not taken by defendant No.2 in

his written statement nor at any stage before concluding of

evidence. Plaintiff filed reply and opposed the application, that

when no such objection was raised at the initial stage, now after

completion of evidence, at the fage end of trial, such application

may not be entertained. The Presiding Officer of the trial court, on

application of defendants framed issue No.4(क), related to the

jurisdiction and decided the same against the plaintiff vide Order

dated 17.08.2021 and suit has been ordered to be returned under

(3 of 9)

[CTA-75/2022]

Order 7 Rule 10 CPC for filing before the competent court having

lower pecuniary jurisdiction.

3.

Plaintiff assailed the Order dated 17.08.2021 by way of filing

S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.1566/2021, before the High

Court. Vide Order 04.01.2022, the High Court set aside the order

dated 17.08.2021 and ordered to restore t