Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Jai Singh vs Kuldeep Sharma & Anr on 4 July, 2013
Author: Vijay Bishnoi
Bench: Vijay Bishnoi
1
S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.6150/13
Jai Singh Vs. Kuldeep Sharma & Anr.
Date of order : 4th July, 2013
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAY BISHNOI
Mr. Pritam Solanki for petitioner.
Mr. P.S. Chundawat for respondent No.1.
------
It is reported by the office that the notices of respondent No.2 are still awaited, however, Mr. P.S. Chundawat has put in appearance on behalf of respondentNo.1.
Both the learned counsel for the parties submit that main controversy is between the petitioner and the respondent No.1 and the UIT is not essential party.
With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally.
This writ petition is preferred by the petitioner being aggrieved by the order dated 12.4.2013 passed by the Additional District Judge No.4, Bikaner (hereinafter referred to as 'the appellate Court') in an appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order of rejection of 2 application for grant of temporary injunction, by the trial court. The appellate Court vide order dated 12.4.2013 has fixed the next date of hearing of the appeal as 25.7.2013 and also restrained the respondent No.1 from alienating the property in question.
The only contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that since the respondent No.1 was planning to raise construction over the property in question, the appellate court should also have restrained the respondent No.1 from raising any construction over the property in question till disposal of the appeal preferred by the petitioner.
Mr. P.S. Chundawat, learned counsel for the respondent No.1 fairly submitted that next date in the appeal is 25.7.2013 and till that date, the respondent No.1 will not raise any construction over the property in question. He also submitted that since respondent No.1 has no intention to raise any construction over the property in question in near future, no order is required to 3 be passed in this writ petition.
Be that as it may, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is disposed with direction that both the parties shall maintain status quo as it exists today in respect of property in question till disposal of the appeal preferred by the petitioner and the appellate court is also requested to decide the appeal expeditiously, preferably on 25.7.2013, the next date already fixed by the appellate court.
[ VIJAY BISHNOI ], J.
babulal/ 15