DHANI RAM Vs. NARINDER SINGH
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) DHANI Ram, appellant, has filed this appeal against order dated 08.06.1982 of learned District Judge, Jammu, whereby while upholding the decree of ejectment passed by Sub Judge, Jammu, against the appellant,
the case was remanded to the trial Court for framing an issue in regard
to arrears of rent.
(2.) THIS appeal was filed on 15.02.2001 alongwith an application seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal. This condonation
application appears to have been allowed on 12.11.2002, when nobody seems
to have appeared on behalf of the respondent despite substituted service.
(3.) SH . L. K. Sharma, learned counsel for respondent, raised a preliminary objection that the appeal was not maintainable, which
according to learned counsel warranted dismissal with exemplary costs for
prolonging the litigation and depriving the respondent of the fruits of
the decree of ejectment affirmed in his favour by District Judge, Jammu,
on 08.06.1982. Learned counsel refers to Gayatri Devi and ors V/s Shashi
Pal Singh reported as (2005) 5 SCC 527.
Sh. Nirmal Kotwal, learned counsel for appellant, meeting the preliminary submission of Sh. Sharma, urged that his appeal was
maintainable in view of the law laid down in AIR 1962 Rajasthan 57. He,
when confronted with the situation, as to how the appellant would
question the decree of ejectment, which had attained finality, in the
absence of any civil second appeal having been filed against it, made a
statement at the bar that the appellant would not press his appeal in so
far as it questioned the decree of ejectment, which stood affirmed on
08.06.1982 by learned District Judge, Jammu. Sh. Kotwal, however, submitted that decree for ejectment could not be executed if the issue
framed by the trial Court, pursuant to the remand order, was decided
against the plaintiff/respondent.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.