Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Nand Kishore & Anr. vs . Vishwanath Kayal on 10 April, 2014
Author: Bela M. Trivedi
Bench: Bela M. Trivedi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.2524/2014 Nand Kishore & Anr. Vs. Vishwanath kayal Date of Order :: 10th April, 2014 Hon'ble Ms. Justice Bela M. Trivedi Mr. Vinod Kumar Tamoliya, for the petitioners. Mr. Mahendra Goyal, for the respondent. BY THE COURT :
1. The present petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution has been filed by the petitioners-defendants, challenging the order dated 25/11/2013 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Fatehpur Shekhawati (hereinafter referred to as 'the Trial Court') in Civil Suit No.84 of 2010, whereby the Trial Court has closed the right of the petitioners to lead the evidence.
2. It is sought to be submitted by the learned counsel Mr. Vinod Kumar Tamoliya for the petitioners that the petitioners had raised the issue of jurisdiction of the Trial Court, and the said issue was pending before the Supreme Court, and therefore the petitioners were seeking time from the Trial Court for leading the evidence. According to him, the Supreme Court, in the appeal preferred by the petitioners, has passed the interim order directing the Trial Court to proceed with the suit proceedings, however, has further directed that the decree, if passed, shall not be executed, and therefore, the petitioners now shall proceed with the suit, and lead the evidence. He also submitted that the petitioners are ready and willing to pay the reasonable cost to the respondent-plaintiff as may be directed by this Court. However, the learned counsel Mr. Mahendra Goyal for the respondent-plaintiff has vehemently submitted that the suit for eviction has been filed by the respondent, but the petitioners are interested in delaying the suit proceedings for one reason or the other. According to him, though more than sufficient opportunities were given to the petitioners to lead the evidence, they had failed to do so, and therefore the present petition deserves to be dismissed.
3. Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsels for the parties, and to the impugned order passed by the Trial Court, it appears that the petitioners-defendants were given more than sufficient opportunities by the Trial Court to lead their evidence, and on two occasions had also imposed the cost, however, the petitioners had failed to adduce any evidence. The Court, therefore, does not find any illegality or infirmity in the impugned order passed by the Trial Court. However, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, more particularly to the fact that the SLP was pending before the Apex Court with regard to the issue of jurisdiction, the petitioners deserve to be granted one last and final opportunity for leading the evidence ,of-course subject to payment of heavy cost.
4. In that view of the matter, the impugned order is set aside. The petitioners are given last and final opportunity to lead the evidence before the Trial Court on the date that may be fixed by the Trial Court, subject to payment of the cost of Rs.25,000 (Rupees : Twenty Five Thousand) on or before 16th April, 2014 to the respondent before the Trial Court.
5. The petition stands allowed accordingly.
(Bela M. Trivedi) J.
Sanjay Solanki PA Sanjay SolankiJrPA41 All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed.Sanjay Solanki Jr. Personal Assistan