High CourtsSingle Bench

Liyakat Ali vs Samsudeen And Others

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 20 September 2023 · Citation: (2023) 09 RAJ CK 0059

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rekha Borana, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908 — Order 1 Rule 10
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Civil First Appeal No. 544 Of 2022
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

10 paragraphs · 350 words

Rekha Borana, J

1.

The present appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 25.11.2022 passed by the Additional District Judge, Deedwana, District Nagaur in Civil Suit No.4 ए/2013 (201/2014) whereby the suit as preferred by the plaintiff for partition, cancellation of sale deed as well as gift deed and permanent injunction has been dismissed.

2.

Learned counsel for the appellant today sought permission to withdraw the present appeal.

3.

An application under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been filed on behalf of five applicants who claim themselves to be the legal representatives of the deceased daughter/sister Huseni with a prayer that they are the necessary parties to the suit for partition and hence, they may be impleaded as parties to the present appeal.

4.

A perusal of the impugned judgment dated 25.11.2022 makes it clear that the suit for partition as preferred by the plaintiff had been dismissed. Meaning thereby, there is no decree for partition by which the applicants, who pray for impleadment, can be said to be aggrieved. If they claim any right, their remedy lies somewhere else. This Court does not find any ground to implead the applicants as party respondents to the present appeal which is sought to be withdrawn by the appellant.

5.

So far as the present appeal is concerned, the appellant has sought permission to withdraw the present appeal and this Court does not find any ground to decline the said prayer.

Hence, the permission for withdrawal as prayed for is granted and the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

6.

Learned counsel for the appellant has made a request that the Court fee as filed in the present appeal be directed to be refunded.

7.

The request as made seems to be reasonable as the appeal has been withdrawn at the initial stage itself. In view of the same, the Court fees is ordered to be refunded back to the appellant. The certificate in this regard be issued by the Registry to learned counsel for the appellant.

8.

The stay application also stands dismissed.