Vinod Kumar Agarwal Vs. Ratan Devi and Ors.
EmailAppeal: Petitioner(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 123/2000
(From the Judgment and Order dated 17/09/1999 in SBCNA 9/11/96 of the High Court of Rajasthan at Jaipur)
(From the Judgment and Order dated 17/09/1999 in SBCNA 9/11/96 of the High Court of Rajasthan at Jaipur)
Petitioner: Vinod Kumar Agarwal
Respondent: Ratan Devi and Ors.
Apeal: Petitioner(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 123/2000
(From the Judgment and Order dated 17/09/1999 in SBCNA 9/11/96 of the High Court of Rajasthan at Jaipur)
(From the Judgment and Order dated 17/09/1999 in SBCNA 9/11/96 of the High Court of Rajasthan at Jaipur)
Judges: S.B. MAJMUDAR, D.P. MOHAPATRA & Y.K. SABHARWAL, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Jan 31, 2000
Appearances:
Mr. Indra Makwana, Advocate for Petitioner.
Head Note:
CONSTITUTION
Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 136; Civil Procedure Code, 1908 – Order 41 – Suit for partition and possession – Application for appointment of receiver – Declined by forums below. Held not a fit case for interference under Article 136. Trial court however, asked to expedite the trial. (Paras 1,2)
JUDGEMENT:
ORDER
1. Having heard learned Counsel for the petitioner we do not think that this is a fit case for our interference under Article 136 of the Constitution of India against the order of the Tribun-al and as confirmed by the High Court not granting the prayer of the plaintiff – petitioner for appointment of receiver pending his suit for partition and separate possession of his 1/4th share in the suit property.
2. However, we are inclined to accept his alternative prayer that at least the suit in question, pending in the court of learned District Judge, Jaipur City, between Vinod Kumar and Ratan Devi & Ors. deserves to be expedited.
3. The learned District Judge, Jaipur City is requested to dis-pose of the said suit after hearing the parties, on merits within a period of six months from the receipt of a copy of this order at his end.
4. The Office of this Court is directed to send a copy of this order to the learned District Judge, Jaipur City, for information and necessary action.
5. The Special Leave Petition is disposed of accordingly.
1. Having heard learned Counsel for the petitioner we do not think that this is a fit case for our interference under Article 136 of the Constitution of India against the order of the Tribun-al and as confirmed by the High Court not granting the prayer of the plaintiff – petitioner for appointment of receiver pending his suit for partition and separate possession of his 1/4th share in the suit property.
2. However, we are inclined to accept his alternative prayer that at least the suit in question, pending in the court of learned District Judge, Jaipur City, between Vinod Kumar and Ratan Devi & Ors. deserves to be expedited.
3. The learned District Judge, Jaipur City is requested to dis-pose of the said suit after hearing the parties, on merits within a period of six months from the receipt of a copy of this order at his end.
4. The Office of this Court is directed to send a copy of this order to the learned District Judge, Jaipur City, for information and necessary action.
5. The Special Leave Petition is disposed of accordingly.
