HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 138/2021

1.

Sriniwas Sharma S/o Late Shri Ramdayal Sharma, R/o

220, Navjeevan Upwan, Dhadhon Ka Bag, Moti Doongari

Road, Jaipur

2.

Ambrish Sharma S/o Late Shri Ramdayal Sharma, R/o

220, Navjeevan Upwan, Dhadhon Ka Bag, Moti Doongari

Road, Jaipur

----Petitioners

Versus

1.

Sukh Sagar Buildcon Private Limited, (Former Name

Safire Ceramic And Glass Private Limited) Office 201,

Laxmi Complex, M.i. Road Jaipur Through Director Shri

Surendra Kumar Baradiya S/o Late Shri Sagar Mal

Bardiya, Aged Abourt 63 Years, R/o Plot No. 20, Bardiaya

Colony, Museum Road, Jaipur.

2.

State Of Rajasthan, Through Principal Secretary, Govt.

Secretariat, Jaipur.

3.

Deputy Govt. Secretary-3Rd, Urban Development

Department, Govt, Secretariat, Jaipur.

4.

Jaipur Nagar Nigam, Jaipur Through Chief Executive

Officer, Lalkhoti, Tonk Road, Jaipur

5.

Commissioner (Ayojana) And Secretary, Building Anugya

And Sankarm Samiti, Nagar Nigam-5, Office Lal Kothi,

Tonk Road, Jaipur

6.

Senior Nagar Niyojak, Nagar Nigam, Lal Kothi, Tonk Road,

Jaipur.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. G.P. Sharma, Advocate

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH GUPTA

Order

16/02/2022

This revision petition has been filed by the petitioners-

defendants No.6 and 7 (hereinafter referred to as 'the

(2 of 2)

[CR-138/2021]

defendants') against the order dated 20.09.2021 passed by Additional

District Judge No.8, Jaipur Metropolitan-I, Jaipur (for short ‘the trial

Court’) in civil suit No. 179/2013, whereby the application filed by the

defendants under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC read with Sections 9 and 151

CPC has been rejected.

The respondent-plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as 'the

plaintiff') filed a civil suit against State & Ors. The defendants filed an

application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC read with Section and 151 CPC.

After hearing the arguments, vide order dated 20.09.2021 the trial

Court dismissed the said application.

Hence, the present revision petition has been filed.

After arguing the matter at some length, learned counsel for

the petitioners prays to withdraw the present revision petition with

liberty to file an application under Order 14 Rule 5 CPC to frame an

issue with regard to the objection taken in paragraph No.17 of the

written statement.

His prayer seems to be genuine. Hence, the revision petition

is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as prayed for. However, if an

application is filed by the defendants no. 6 & 7 under Order 14 Rule 5

CPC, then the trial Court shall decide the same in accordance with law.

If the application is allowed and an issue is found to be made out, then

the trial court shall frame the issue and decide the same in the light of

the provisions of Order 14 Rule 2 CPC.

However, taking into consideration the fact that the suit

pertains to the year 2013, the trial court is directed to decide the same

expeditiously but not later than 9 months from the date of receipt of

certified copy of this order.

(PRAKASH GUPTA),J

Dk