Home   |   About us   |   Contact us   |   Request Callback  


This Page To:

[ In the Supreme Court of India, CA No. 4849 of 2011. ] 30/05/2011
Advocate(s) : Shobha, Ridhima Garg. Sushil Kumar Jain, Shailesh Prakash Sharma, Saghir Ahmed, Sumita Hazarika.
Judgment Full Text : Existing LawyerServices Members, kindly login above.

Non Members, Enter your email address:- and , to request this judgment.

Alternatively, you may send a request by email to info@lawyerservices.in for the Full Text of this Judgment (chargeable).

LawyerServices Facebook Page

#LawyerServices #bestlegalsoftware #legalsoftware #judgment #caselaw

  "2014 (16) SCC 295"  ==   ""  

    1. Issue notice.2. Mr. Sushil Kumar Jain who has appeared on caveat on behalf of the respondents accepts notice. Learned counsel for the parties agree that the matter may be finally disposed of at this stage.3. Leave granted.4. This appeal is directed against order dated 10.05.2011 passed by the learned Single Judge of the Rajasthan High Court in Single Bench Civil Miscellaneous Stay Application No. 1292 of 2011 in Single Bench Civil First Appeal No. 259 of 2011 whereby he directed the parties to maintain status quo in respect of the property in dispute.5. The suit for declaration and permanent injunction filed by the respondents in respect of the property i.e. plot no. 48 situated at Sahar Moti Dungri Road Gangwal Park Jaipur was dismissed by the trial court vide judgment dated 18.4.2011.The first appeal filed by the respondents was admitted and the miscellaneous application filed by them for interim relief was disposed of by the learned Single Judge in the following terms:Heard learned counsel for the parties on stay application and after considering their submissions it is directed that parties shall maintain status-quo in respect of property in dispute about possession as well as alienation during pendency of the appeal.Stay application stands disposed off.6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.7. Ordinarily this Court is loath to interfere with an interlocutory order passed by the High Court but keeping in view the fact that the order of status quo passed in this case will adversely affect the interest of both the parties inasmuch as the constructed property will decay during the pendency of the appeal we deem it proper to set aside the impugned order and issue the following directions:(i) Within a period of four weeks from today the appellant shall deposit a sum of Rs. 75 lakhs (Rupees Seventy Five lakhs) in the Registry of the Rajasthan High Court Jaipur Bench.(ii) The amount deposited by the appellant shall be invested in Fixed Deposit for a period of one year in the first instance.(iii) The appellant shall be free to alienate the constructed property subject to the condition that he shall maintain complete account of each and every alienation and submit the same before the High Court within four weeks from the alienation and supply a copy thereof to the respondents.(iv) The parties are directed to appear before the Mediation Centre attached to the Rajasthan High Court Jaipur Bench on 27.05.2011 to explore the possibility of negotiate settlement.(v) If the parties are able to amicably resolve their dispute either of them may apply to the High Court for disposal of the appeal in terms of the settlement.8. The appeal is disposed of in the manner indicated above.