HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 123/2016

1.

Narayan Ashram, Naya Nagar, Beawar Through Prem

Kishan S/o Late Shri Shrikishan Ji Garg, Managing T,

Ajmer Road, Beawar, District Ajmer, Raj. Retgistered

Office At Prem Bhawan, Bhupalganj, Bhilwara Raj.

2.

Prem Kishan Garg S/o Late Shri Shrikishan Ji Garg

Managing Trustee Narayan Ashram, Ajmer Road, Beawar,

District Ajmer Raj.

----Petitioners

Versus

1.

State Of Rajasthan Through Chief Secretary, Rajasthan

State, Secretariat, Jaipur Raj.

2.

State Of Rajasthan Through Principal Secretary, Primary

Education, Rajasthan State, Secretariat, Jaipur Raj.

3.

State Of Rajasthan Through Director Primary Education,

Bikaner Raj.

4.

State Of Rajasthan Through District Collector, Ajmer Raj.

5.

Smt. Rekha Jain W/o Late Shri Om Prakash Jain, Sendra

Road, Govindpura, Ajmer, Principal, Government Girls

Upper Primary School, Narsinghpura, Tehsil Beawar,

District Ajmer.

6.

Government Girls Upper Primary School, Narsinghpura,

Tehsil Beawar, District Ajmer Through Headmaster.

7.

State Of Rajasthan Through Tehidlar, Beawar, District

Ajmer.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. Jai Prakash Gupta,Adv.

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. Akshay Sharma, Addl. G.C.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA

Order

29/04/2019

(2 of 4)

[CW-123/2016]

1.

The petitioners by way of this writ petition assail the

order dated 12.10.2015 passed by Addl. District & Sessions Judge

No.2, Beawar in Civil Suti No.149/2012 (74/12) (Narayan Ashram

& Anr. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.) whereby his application

moved under Order 14 Rule 5 CPC was rejected.

2

Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that after

the issues were framed by the trial Court, the petitioners

submitted an application under Order 14 Rule 5 CPC pointing out

that the entire suit filed by the petitioners is for an injunction,

grant of possession, mesne profit and declaration relating to the

property. The issues which were originally framed on 14.8.2015 do

not refer to any of the contentions relating to possession and

mesne profit and, therefore, in terms of Order 14 Rule 5 CPC, the

prayer for adding issues ought to have been allowed.

Learned Counsel in support of his submission also taken

this Court to the order 14 Rule 1 CPC and to the pleadings of the

parties to submit that the petitioner has pleaded a fact regarding

the dispossession and claiming of possession and mesne profit

from the respondents which the respondents have denied. In

view of denial, issues were required to be framed.

3

Learned Counsel further submits that another issue

framed by the trial Court relating to the land belonging to Nagar

Parishad, Beawar as mentioned in issue No.3, was wholly

unwarranted and uncalled for as in their reply to the written

statement filed by the respondents, there is no pleading that the

disputed lands belong to the Nagar Parishad, Beawar and,

therefore, the word ‘Nagar Parishad, Beawar’ ought to be

deleted from issue No.3.

(3 of 4)

[CW-123/2016]

4

Per contra, learned Counsel appearing for the

respondents submits that in the written statements the

respondents have specifically pleaded that the disputed land was

belonging to the Nagar Parishad, Beawar and were lands of the

school and they were regularly allotted for the purpose of school

vide order dated 28.10.1998. In view thereof, issue No.3 was

rightly framed. As regards issue of possession and mesne profit,

learned Counsel does not seriously object to the addition.

5

I have heard learned Counsels and find that there is a

specific averment regarding the possession and the mesne profit

by the respondents which has been denied by the respondent-

defendants and, therefore, in terms of Order 14 Rule 1 CPC an

issue in this regard ought to have been framed by the trial Court.

So far other suggested issues are concerne