SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
SAMEER JAIN
ANOOP KAUSIK S/O SHRI JUGAL KISHORE KAUSIK – Appellant
Versus
SMT. CHOTI DEVI W/O SHR LAXMAN SAINI – Respondent
CW/20722/2019



HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 20722/2019

1.

Anoop Kausik S/o Shri Jugal Kishore Kausik, Aged About

42 Years, By Caste Brahman R/o Village Sohasra, Tehsile

Loharu, District Bhiwani (Haryana) Present Address 12,

J.k. Nagar, 200 Foot Baipass, Takar Wala Kuwa, City And

District Alwar

2.

Dilip Yadav S/o Shri Balaram Yadav, By Caste Ahir R/o

102, Chetan Enclave, City And District Alwar

----Petitioners

Versus

1.

Smt. Choti Devi W/o Shr Laxman Saini, By Caste Mali R/o

Dhobi Ghata Present Address Jhariya Wala Kuwa, Near

Budha Vihar, Alwar Rajasthan

2.

Smt. Sushila Devi W/o Shri Hariram, By Caste Mali R/o

Dhobi Ghata Present Address Jhariya Wala Kuwa, Near

Budha Vihar, Alwar Rajasthan

3.

Babulal Saini S/o Shri Laxmanram Saini, By Caste Mali

R/o Jhariya Wala Kuwa, Near Budha Vihar, Alwar

4.

Nagar Vikas Nyas, Through Chairman, Office Nagar Vikas

Nyas, Alwar, Rajasthan

5.

Secretary, Nagar Vikas Nyas, Office Nagar Vikas Nyas,

Alwar

6.

Smt. Kuldeep Kaur W/o Late Mohansingh, By Cast Jat

Sikha Tehsile Laxmangar District

----Respondents

Connected With

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 20655/2019

1.

Anoop Kaushik S/o Shri Jugal Kishore Kausik By Caste

Brahman, Aged About 42 Years, R/o Village Sohasra,

Tehsile Loharu, District Bhiwani (Haryana) Present

Address 12, J.k. Nagar, 200 Foot Baipass, Takar Wala

Kuwa, City And District Alwar.

2.

Dilip Yadav S/o Shri Balaram Yadav, By Caste Ahir, R/o

102, Chetan Enclave, City And District Alwar.

----Petitioners

Versus

(2 of 4)

[CW-20722/2019]

1.

Laxman Saini S/o Ramjilal, By Caste Mali, R/o Dhobi

Ghata Present Address R/o Jhariya Wala Kuwa, Near

Budha Vihar, Alwar.

2.

Hariram Saini S/o Ramjilal, By Caste Mali, R/o Dhobi

Ghata Present Address R/o Jhariya Wala Kuwa, Near

Budha Vihar, Alwar.

3.

Babulal Saini S/o Shri Laxminarayan Saini, By Caste Mali,

R/o Jhariya Wala Kuwa, Near Budha Vihar, Alwar.

4.

Nagar Vikas Nyas, Through Chairman, Office Nagar Vikas

Nyas, Alwar, Rajasthan.

5.

Secretary, Nagar Vikas Nyas, Office Nagar Vikas Nyas,

Alwar.

6.

Smt. Kuldeep Kaur W/o Late Mohansingh, By Caste Jat

Sikha Tehsile Laxmangar District.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. Mohit Gupta

For Respondent(s)

:

Mr. Shailesh Prakash Sharma

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

Order

12/01/2023

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

petitioners filed a suit for specific performance and permanent

injunction on 15.06.2012. Status qua order was passed on

31.05.2013. Thereafter, issues were framed by the learned Trial

Court on 21.05.2015 and vide order dated 05.11.2015 the learned

Trial Court directed that the agreement to sale be sent to the

Collector (Stamp) for impounding. On 29.11.2016, the suit was

dismissed in default due to non presence of the petitioner’s

counsel. The petitioners filed the restoration application within the

prescribed time. However, the same was also dismissed on

11.02.2019. Learned counsel submits that the requisite stamp

(3 of 4)

[CW-20722/2019]

duty was paid by the petitioners on 28.03.2019 but despite that

the review application against order dated 11.02.2019 was

dismissed, vide impugned order dated 20.09.2019. The present

petition is filed essential to restore the matter that was dismissed

in default.

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submits that

the learned Trial Court had rightly dismissed the suit of the

petitioners after considering the tardy and casual approach of the

petitioners. The petitioners were intentionally filling unnecessary

applications to delay the proceedings despite the directions of this

Court, vide order dated 20.03.2015 in SBCWP No.2439/2013, to

dispose of the proceedings within a period of nine months.

Learned counsel further submits that even the entire stamp duty

was not deposited by the petitioners.

After arguing at length, learned counsel for

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top