High CourtsSingle Bench

M/s. Manzoor Ali Mohammad Ali vs Addl. District Judge and Others

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 4 February 2013 · Citation: (2013) 2 WLN 311

HON’BLE JUDGES
Gopal Krishan Vyas, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 1 Rule 10 · Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 227
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Civil Writ Petition No. 4023 of 2011
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

2 paragraphs · 240 words

Gopal Krishan Vyas, J.—Heard learned counsel for the parties. In this writ petition filed under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner applicant is challenging order dt. 07.04.2011 passed by Additional District Judge, Parbatsar in Civil Suit No. 37/2011 whereby, an application filed by the petitioner under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC was rejected.

2.

Admittedly, petitioner is claiming his right to implead him as party on the basis of license issued in his favour for 222.5 x 53 ft of land by the Mining department whereas, in all Bapi patta No. 44 was issued in the year 1922 by the erstwhile State of Jodhpur in favour of Vijay Singh S/o Ram Singh and in fact the total dimension of the said patta was 295 x 28 ft out of which license was granted in favour of petitioner applicant for 222.5 x 53 ft and the plaintiff Sardar Kanwar W/o Sajjan Singh is claiming right for rest of the land which 73 x 28 ft, therefore, obviously, trial Court after considering entire facts of the case rejected the application filed by the petitioner. In the opinion of this Court, there is no error apparent in the order impugned because the plaintiff respondent is not claiming his right on this land for which license has been issued in favour of the petitioner. Therefore, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the writ petition. The Writ petition is hereby dismissed.