Rajasthan High Court - JodhpurVijay Singh vs Bharat Singh on 15 September, 2008Author:Prakash TatiaBench:Prakash Tatia1

                                  S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.1287/2006
                                          Vijay Singh. vs. Bharat Singh.


          S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.1287/2006
             Vijay Singh vs. Bharat Singh.

Date : 15.9.2008

             HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J.Mr.V Vishnoi, for the appellant.Mr.Shambhoo Singh, for the respondent.- - - - -Heard learned counsel for the parties.The   appellant   submitted   application        for    setting
aside of the abatement of appeal by moving application
underOrder 22 Rule 9 CPCand application underOrder
22 Rule 3 CPCas also an application underSection 5of
the Limitation Act.According to learned counsel for the appellant,
appellant Vijay Singh died on 7.10.2007 leaving behind
four legal representatives named in the application.
According to learned counsel for the appellant, due to
the reasons mentioned in the above application, there
was some delay in moving the application for bringing
the legal representatives on record.2S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.1287/2006
                                                   Vijay Singh. vs. Bharat Singh.Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that
he has no objection if the abatement is set aside.In view of the above, the delay in filing the
application is condoned, the abatement is set aside and
the   legal   representatives         of   the     deceased       appellant
Vijay Singh are taken on record. Amended cause title
has already been filed and the same be taken on record.Heard learned counsel for the parties finally.The appellant submitted an application for grant
of interim injunction which was denied by the trial
court vide order dated 28.7.2006. This Court vide order
dated   12.9.2006    granted      interim         order      to     maintain
status quo with respect to the property in dispute.
This order dated 12.9.2006 has already been confirmed
on 17.7.2007 and this Court directed the trial court to
decide the suit expeditiously.Looking to the facts of the case, this appeal is
disposed of with a direction to both the parties to
maintain status quo with respect to the property in
dispute during the pendency of the suit.The   trial   court   has       already       been      directed       to3S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.1287/2006
                                                          Vijay Singh. vs. Bharat Singh.decide      the   suit      expeditiously      vide       order       dated
          17.7.2007, therefore, the trial court is again directed
          to decide the suit expeditiously preferably within a
          period of one year from the date of receipt of the copy
          of   this     order,     which    may   be     supplied        by     legal
          representatives        of   the   appellant      before       the     trial
          court.(PRAKASH TATIA), J.S.Phophaliya