Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SUKHDEV AND ORS versus SH.OM PRAKASH PHULWARIA

High Court of Rajasthan

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


SUKHDEV AND ORS v SH.OM PRAKASH PHULWARIA - CW Case No. 1763 of 2007 [2007] RD-RJ 2061 (17 April 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

JAIPUR BENCH 1. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1763/07

Sukhdev & Ors. Vs. Om Prakash Phulwaria & Ors. 7.04.2007

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Rafiq

Shri N.K. Maloo for petitioners.

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners against the order passed by the learned

Board of Revenue on 6.7.2006 whereby the Board while deciding four special appeals and three contempt petitions, dismissed the contempt petition with the finding that compliance of the judgment of the Single

Bench of the Board dated 19.2.04 has already been made on 25.4.2004 whereas the status quo order with regard to land in dispute was passed by the division bench of the

Board on 11.6.04.

Shri N.K. Maloo, the learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the Board has neither taken into consideration the detailed averments made by the petitioners in the contempt petition with reference to records produced as also the fact that crop of the petitioner standing on the land was auctioned by the respondent in spite of such status quo order who was then Tehsildar, Chomu. He argued that the contempt petition was dismissed without even calling upon the said Tehsildar to submit his reply to such allegations.

The Board held that contempt was not maintainable merely on the basis of entires made in the `Ghatna Bahi' and did not take into consideration the fact that the possession as on the date of passing status quo order was with the petitioners. It was argued that though in substance the matter may not make any difference because the possession of the disputed land is still with the petitioners but because a finding thereabout has been recorded by the Board without taking into consideration the detailed assertions made by the petitioners in their contempt petition with reference to possession on the ground and on record, this finding will prejudice the case of the petitioners in the writ petition filed against the judgments in the four special appeals which are pending before this Court. Hence this writ petition.

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the material on record, I find that when already the petitioners admits that the land in dispute is still in their possession and the controversy in the contempt petition was based on auction of the crop for a particular year, no useful purpose would be now served in entertaining this writ petition against that part of the judgment by which the contempt petition filed by the petitioners was dismissed. However, I deem it appropriate to set the petitioners at liberty to question the correctness of the finding in so far as the status of the land and their possession on such land at the relevant time as recorded in para 19 of the impugned judgment in the writ petition filed against the judgment passed in the special appeals.

With these observations, the writ petition is dismissed.

(Mohammad Rafiq),J.

Rs/-


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.