Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Smt Yogeshwari Kumarrs vs Arvind Singh Mewar on 26 August, 2014
Bench: Dipak Misra, Abhay Manohar Sapre
1
ITEM NO.12 COURT NO.8 SECTION XV
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 16500/2013
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 12/12/2012
in SBCMA No. 47/2012 passed by the High Court Of Judicature for
Rajasthan At Jodhpur)
SMT YOGESHWARI KUMARI Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
ARVIND SINGH MEWAR AND ORS Respondent(s)
(With interim relief and office report)
Date : 26/08/2014 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPAK MISRA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sudhir Chandra, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Parijat Sinha, Adv.
Ms. Reshmi Rea Sinha, Adv.
Mr. Anil Kumar Mishra, Adv.
Mr. S.C. Ghosh, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. M. K. Garg, Adv. (R.2)
R.1 Mr. Puneet Jain, Adv.
Mr. Aslam Naushad, Adv.
Ms. Chhaya Kirti, Adv.
For Ms. Pratibha Jain, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
In the course of hearing, a suggestion was given to the Mr. Puneet Jain, learned counsel for the respondent no.1 whether the said respondent would have any objection Signature Not Verified if, in the lease deed, a clause is incorporated that the Digitally signed by Naveen Kumar Date: 2014.08.27 16:59:52 IST same is being executed subject to the final verdict of the Reason: suit for partition, which is pending for adjudication before the Trial Court.
2Mr. M.K. Garg, learned counsel for the respondent no.2 stated that he has no objection if such a clause is incorporated so that the interest of the plaintiff would be protected and the special leave petition can be disposed of.
Mr. Chandra, learned senior counsel for the petitioners prays for some time to obtain instructions. Similar prayer has also been made by Mr. Puneet Jain, learned counsel appearing for respondent no.1.
Let the matter be listed only for the aforesaid purpose on 02.09.2014. It is hereby made clear that the suggestion given in praesenti has nothing to do with the merits of the case.
(NAVEEN KUMAR) (RENUKA SADANA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER