HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Writs No. 27959/2018

Abdul Hakeem S/o Shri Abdul Karim, Aged About 54 Years, By

Caste Musalman, R/o Ward No. 45, Pipli Chock, Kasba-

Jhunjhunu Tehsil And District Jhunjhunu. Rajasthan

----Petitioner

Versus

1.

Hansraj S/o Late Shri Gaurishankar, Aged About 53 Years,

By Caste Kumawat, R/o Ward No. 21, In The Middle Of

Raoad No. 2 And 3, Kasba- Jaunjhunu, Tehsil And District

Jhunjhunu, Rajsthan

2.

Prem Kuamr S/o Late Shri Gaurishankar, By Caste

Kumawat, R/o Ward No. 21, In The Middle Of Raoad No. 2

And 3, Kasba- Jaunjhunu, Tehsil And District Jhunjhunu,

Rajsthan

3.

Suresh Kuamr S/o Late Shri Gaurishankar, By Caste

Kumawat, R/o Ward No. 21, In The Middle Of Raoad No. 2

And 3, Kasba- Jaunjhunu, Tehsil And District Jhunjhunu,

Rajsthan

4.

Rajesh Kuamr S/o Late Shri Gaurishankar, By Caste

Kumawat, R/o Ward No. 21, In The Middle Of Raoad No. 2

And 3, Kasba- Jaunjhunu, Tehsil And District Jhunjhunu,

Rajsthan

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s)

:

Mr. O.P. Jhajharia

For Respondent(s)

:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA

Order

22/01/2019

An application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 read with Section

151 CPC for temporary injunction was declined by the trial Court

vide impugned order dated 23^rd July, 2018 and an appeal was also

instituted unsuccessfully as would be evident from 28^th September,

2018; is the cause for institution of the present writ petition.

(2 of 2)

[CW-27959/2018]

Learned counsel for the petitioner assailing the impugned

order insistently argued that he purchased the land in dispute

from one Sawai Singh S/o Govind Singh. Courts below while

considering the plea specifically recorded a finding to the effect

that there was no documentary evidence as to how the subject

land vested in Sawai Singh.

Heard and considered.

On a glance of the impugned orders, it is reflected that

Courts below have examined the petitioner’s application under

Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 read with Section 151 CPC, on the well

settled three principles i.e. primafacie case, irreparable loss and

balance of convenience so also the principle that a person cannot

pass a better tittle then himself. Mere deposit of tax and

possession cannot confer title.

On being queried by the Court, learned counsel could not

dislodge the findings of the Courts below on the issue as to how

Sawai Singh was entitled, in law, to transfer the immovable

property involved. No response has been put forth by the counsel

for the petitioner, sustainable in law.

For the reasons aforesaid so also in view of the reasonings

recorded by the Courts below while declining application for grant

of temporary injunction; I am not inclined to interfere with the

orders impugned in exercise of writ jurisdiction under Article 227

of the Constitution of India.

In the result, writ application fails, and is, hereby dismissed.

(VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA),J

M.Meena/104