Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2005 DIGILAW 1896 (RAJ)

Dharam Singh v. Kashi Ram

2005-07-25

KAMAL NAYAN SHRIMAL, R.N.ARVIND

body2005
Jheky] lnL;&;g f}rh; vihy vUrxZr /kkjk 224 jktLFkku dkrdkjh vf/kfu;e] 1955 ¼ftls rRipkr~ vf/kfu;e kCn ls lEcksf/kr fd;k tkosxk½ jktLo vihy vf/kdkjh] guqekux<+ }kjk vihy la- 475@94 esa ikfjr fu.kZ; o fMØh fnukad 16-11-99 ds fo:) izLrqr dh xbZA 2- la{ksi esa izdj.k ds rF; bl izdkj gS fd oknh /keZflag iq= jkethyky us ,d jktLo okn izfroknh dkkhjke o vU; ds fo:) gd dh ?kks"k.kk ds ckcr~ vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 88 ds rgr izLrqr fd;k vkSj dgk fd jkethyky iq= ;ksdj.k o dkkhjke iq= jkeir dks fnukad 30-11-71 dks pd 25 ih,e dh 18 ch?kk 16 fcLok o pd 15 ih,e dh 22 ch?kk Hkwfe vkoafVr dh xbZ ftlesa jkethyky o dkkhjke dk vk/kk&vk/kk fgLlk FkkA fnukad 16-2-73 dks pd 45 ih,e dh 17 ch?kk 18 fcLok Hkwfe Hkh jkethyky dk dkkhjke dks cfgLlk cjkcj ntZ gqbZA nksuksa us mDr Hkwfe dk caVokjk dj j[kk Fkk rFkk eqrkfcd caVokjk pd 15 ih-,e- ds iRFkj ua- 223@413 fdyk ua- 6 rk 14] 17 rk 24 dqy 16 ch?kk Hkwfe jkethyky dks izkIr gqbZ rFkk ks"k Hkwfe dkkhjke dks izkIr gqbZA ijUrq dkkhjke ds fo:) vkoUVu fnukad 30-11-71 dh fkdk;r gqbZ vkSj ,lhlh] guqekux<+ us fnukad 24-1-77 dks mldk vkoUVu [kkfjt dj fn;k rFkk mldh vihy dks Hkh [kkfjt dj fn;k x;kA fu.kZ; fnukad 24-1-77 ls jkethyky dks dksbZ ljksdkj ugha FkkA D;ksafd fkdk;r dsoy dkkhjke ds f[kykQ Fkh ijUrq oknh o izfroknhx.k la- 3 o 4 ds firk jkethyky dks iq[rk vkoUVu Hkwfe pd 15 ih,e dh 16 ch?kk rFkk pd 45 ih,e dh 17 ch?kk 18 fcLok Hkwfe ij dsoy oknh o mlds HkkbZ;ksa izfroknhx.k 3 o 4 dk gh gd gSA vr% tekcUnh nq:Lr dh tkosA okn oknh ntZ jftLVj dj izfroknhx.k dks ryc fd;k x;kA izfroknh la- 3 o 1 us bdckfy;k tokc nkok fn;k gSA ks"k izfroknhx.k la- 2 o 4 ds f[kykQ ckotwn ds gkftj u gksus ij bdrjQk dk;Zokgh dh xbZ gSA jktLFkku ljdkj us vius tokc esa fookfnr Hkwfe vkofUVr gksuk Lohdkj fd;k gS rFkk jkethyky dh Hkwfe muds uke ntZ djus esa dksbZ ,rjkt ugha dgkA fopkj.k U;k;ky; us muds fu.kZ; fnukad 9-5-94 }kjk oknh dk okn [kkfjr fd;k rFkk rglhynkj] jkorlj dks vknsk fn;k fd vkoUVu fnukad 30-11-71 o 16-2-73 cgd jkethyky iq= ;ksdj.k o cusflag] dkkhjke iq= jkeir dh iw.kZ tkap dj l{ke vf/kdkjh dks viuk izfrosnu isk djsaA mDr fu.kZ; ,oa fMØh ls O;fFkr gksdj vihykFkhZ@oknh /keZflag us izFke vihy jktLo vihy izkf/kdkjh] guqekux< ds le{k izLrqr dh ftls mUgksaus muds fu.kZ; ,oa fMØh fnukad 16-11-99 }kjk [kkfjt dj fn;kA mDr fu.kZ; ,oa fMØh ls {kqC/k gksdj vihykFkhZ@oknh /keZflag us ;g f}rh; vihy jktLo e.My jktLFkku] vtesj esa izLrqr dhA 3- f}rh; vihy ds yfEcr jgrs izR;FkhZ la- 2 cusflag us ,d izkFkZuk i= vUrxZr /kkjk 151 lhihlh fnukad 21-4-2005 dks isk dj fuosnu fd;k fd izR;FkhZ la- 1 dkkhjke e`R;q fnukad 19-6-2004 dks gks xbZA e`rd ds dk;e eqdke dks vfHkys[k ij ysus dh dk;Zokgh ugha dh xbZ gSA vihy Lor% gh vcsV gks pqdh gS] vr% vihy dks vcsVesaV ds vk/kkj ij [kkfjt fd;k tkosaA vihykFkhZ /keZflag us fnukad 23-4-2004 dks izkFkZuk i= isk dj vihykFkhZ }kjk dkkhjke dks lEeu rkehy okLrs uksfVl ryokuk le; le; ij izLrqr fd;s tkrs jgs gSaA fnukad 19-10-2004 dks vihykFkhZ us jftLVMZ uksfVl Hkh isk fd;k] ftlds laca/k esa dksbZ lwpuk ugha vkbZA bl izdkj izR;FkhZ cusflag }kjk izkFkZuk i= izLrqr djus ij vihykFkhZ dks fnukad 31-4-2005 dks ;g Kku gqvk fd dkkhjke dh e`R;q gks pqdh gS cusflag us vius izkFkZuk i= esa dkkhjke ds mRrjkf/kdkfj;ksa dh la[;k ,oa uke ugha crk, gS] ftUgsa vknsk 22 fu;e 10¼d½ ds vUrxZr crk;k tkuk vko;d gS izR;FkhZ }kjk izkFkZuk i= v/kwjk gSA vr% dkkhjke ds mRrjkf/kdkfj;ksa dks vfHkys[k ij fy;k tkosa rFkk izR;FkhZ ds vf/koDrk dks funsZk fn;s tkosa fd os dkkhjke ds fof/k izfrfuf/k;ksa dh lEiw.kZ lwpuk vihykFkhZx.k dks nsaA vxj ;g ekuk tk;s fd vihy vcsV gksrh gS rks iwjk ugha gksrhA 4- izR;qRrj esa izR;FkhZx.k ds fo}ku vf/koDrk dk rdz gS fd vihykFkhZ o izR;FkhZx.k vkil esa lxs HkkbZ gS rFkk leir dh larku gS ,oa ,d gh xkao esa fuokl djrs gSA vr% ;g dguk gS fd vihykFkhZ dks vius lxs HkkbZ dh e`R;q dh tkudkjh fnukad 21-4-2005 dks gqbZ] ekuus ;ksX; ugha gSA vihy vcsV gks xbZ gS] vr% vihy dks [kkfjt fd;k tkosaA vihy dh cgl gksus ds ipkr~ vihykFkhZ us dkkhjke ds fof/kd izfrfuf/k;ksa dh lwph dj mUgsa vfHkys[k ij ysus dk vuqrks"k pkgkA 5- geus mHk; i{k ds fo}ku vf/koDrkvksa dh cgl ij euu fd;k rFkk i=koyh dk voyksdu fd;kA 6- vknsk 22 fu;eu fu;e 11 lhihlh bl izdkj gS fd%& ^^bl vknsk dks vihy dks ykxw djus esa tgka rd gks lds] ^^oknh^^ kCn ds vUrxZr vihykFkhZ] ^^izfroknh^^ kCn ds vUrxZr izR;FkhZ vkSj ^^okn^^ kCn ds vUrxZr vihy le>h tk;sxhA** vknsk 22 fu;e 4¼1½ o ¼3½ bl izdkj gS%& ^^¼1½ tgka nks ;k vf/kd izfrokfn;ksa esa ls ,d dh e`R;q gks tkrh gS vkSj okn ykus dk vf/kdkj vdsys mRrjthoh izfroknh ds ;k vdsys mRrjthoh izfrokfn;ksa ds fo:) cpk ugha jgrk gS ;k ,dek= izfroknh ;k ,d ek= mRrjthoh izfroknh dh e`R;q gks tkrh gS vkSj okn ykus dk vf/kdkj cpk jgrk gS ogka ml fufeRr fd;s x;s vkosnu ij U;k;ky; e`r izfroknh ds fof/kd izfrfuf/k dks i{kdkj cuok;sxk vkSj okn esa vxzlj gksxkA ¼2½------- ¼3½ tgka fof/k }kjk ifjlhfer le; ds Hkhrj dksbZ vkosnu mifu;eu ¼1½ ds v/khu ugha fd;k tkrk gS ogka okn dk] tgka rd og e`r izfroknh ds fo:) gS] mikeu gks tk;sxkA** mijksDr ls Li"V gS fd izR;FkhZ la- 1 dkkhjke dh e`R;q gks tkus ij mlds fof/kd izfrfuf/k;ksa dks okn esa i{kdkj cukus ds fy;s vuqPNsn 120 ifjlhek vf/kfu;e] 1963 dk ykxw gksxk vkSj e`rd ds fof/kd izfrfuf/k;ksa dks vfHkys[k ij ysus ds fy;s vkosnu e`rd dh e`R;q ds 90 fnu ds vUrxZr fn;k tkuk pkfg;sA eksyw o vU; cuke lksju o vU; ,vkbZvkj 1993 iatkc ,.M gfj;k.kk ist 81 esa ekuuh; mPp U;k;ky; us vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k gS fd%& ``Limitation Act (1963), Arts. 120, 137-Death of plaintiff-Impleadment of legal representative-Limitation-Would be governed by Art. 120 and not Art. 137-Application to be filed within 90 days from date of death of plaintiff. enu uk;d cuke galkscyk nsoh ,vkbZvkj 1983 ,llh 676 esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; esa ;g vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k gS fd%& ``It may be mentioned that no specific order for abatement of a proceeding underone or the other provision of O. 22 is envisaged, the abatement takes place on its own force by passage of time. In fact a specific order is necessary under O. 22, R. 9, C.P.C. for setting aside the abatement. izuxr ekeys esa izR;FkhZ la- 1 dkkhjke dk LoxZokl fnukad 19-6-2004 dks gqvkA bl dkj.k vihykFkhZ dh vihy vcsV gks xbZA ifjlhek vf/kfu;e] 1963 ds vuqPNsn 121 esa mikeu dks vikLr djkus ds fy;s vof/k] mikeu dh rkjh[k ls lkB fnu ns j[kh gSA bl dkj.k gekjh lqfopkfjr jk; esa U;k;ky; }kjk mikeu ds vkSipkfjd vknsk dh ?kks"k.kk vko;d ugha gSA mikeu dks fujLr djus ds fy;s i{kdkj dh e`R;q dh tkudkjh vkosnd dks u gksuk ,d dkj.k gS] ftl ij fopkj fd;k tk ldrk gS ijUrq mlds fy, foyEc {kek djus dk izkFkZuk i= vko;d gSA izuxr izdj.k esa e`rd dkkhjke vihykFkhZ /keZflag dk lxk HkkbZ gS o mlh xkao esa jgrk gS] bl dkj.k bl ckr dh mi/kkj.kk yh tk ldrh gS fd vihykFkhZ dks izR;FkhZ dkkhjke dh e`R;q dh tkudkjh FkhA 7- vihykFkhZ us ifjlhek vf/kfu;e] 1963 dh /kkjk 5 dk Hkh dksbZ izkFkZuk i= foyEc dks {kek djus ds fy;s izLrqr ugha fd;k tks gekjh lqfopkfjr jk; esa vko;d gSA Jatav Panchayat Committee vs. VII Addl. District Judge, Etawah ,vkbZvkj 2000 bykgkckn ist 253 esa ;g vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k gS fd%& ``An Application made after 90 days from the date of death, is an application for substitution upon setting aside abatement. The prayer for abatement being made within the period of limitation the substitution would be made only after setting aside the abatement and, therefore, no application explaining the delay would be necessary, if such application is made with a prayer for setting aside abatement within 150 days from the date of death. But at the same time, the said application cannot be maintained without the prayer for setting aside abatement. But at the same time, the said application cannot be maintained without the prayer for setting aside abatement. If such application for setting aside abatement is made after 150 days, in that event, definitely an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, would be necessary...... bl dkj.k vihy dk mikeu gks x;kA foyEc kkfey fd;s tkus gsrq dksbZ kiFki= lefFkZr ifjlhek vf/kfu;e dh /kkjk 5 ds vUrxZr izkFkZuk i= izLrqr ugha fd;k x;k gSA ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us jk/kksflag cuke eksguflag ¼2001½ 9 ,llhlh ist 717 esa vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k gS %& ``Since it is not disputed that the appeal filed before the Additional Collector was beyond time by 10 days and an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act was not filed for condonation of delay, there was no jurisdiction in the Additional Collector to allow that appeal. The appeal was liable to be dismissed on the ground of limitation. The Board or Revenue before which the question of limitation was agitated was of the view that though an application for condonation of delay was not filed, the delay shall be deemed to have been condoned. This is patently erroneous. In this situation, the High Court was right in setting aside the judgment of the Additional Collector as also of the Board of Revenue. We find no infirmity in the impugned judgment. The appeal is dismissed. 8- vihy esa cgl lquus ds ipkr~ vihykFkhZ us dkkhjke ds fof/kd izfrfuf/k;ksa dh lwph isk dj vfHkys[k ij ysus dk tks vuqrks"k pkgk gS] og vLohdkj fd;k tkrk gSA 9- vc gesa ;g ns[kuk gS fd D;k e`rd dkkhkjke dk uke gVus ls ;g vihy py ldrh gS vFkok ugha ;k iwjh vihy vcsV gksrh gSA tgka rd vihykFkhZ us vuqrks"k pkgk gS] og lHkh izR;FkhZx.k ds fo:) pkgk gSA izR;FkhZ la- 2 ls 4 ds fgr i`Fkd&i`Fkd ugha gS] buesa ls fdlh ,d ds i{kdkj ugha jgus ls vihy ml gn rd vcsV ugha gks ldrh o fHkUu&fHkUu fMfØ;ka ikfjr gksus dh laHkkouk gSA vr% mijksDr foospu ds ifjizs{; esa ge bl fu"d"kZ ij igqaps gS fd vihy iw.kZ :i ls vcsV gksrh gSA 10- ifj.kker% vihykFkhZ }kjk izLrqr izkFkZuk i= fnukad 21-4-2005 fujLr fd;k tkrk gSA vkt dh rkjh[k esa vihy gh vfLrRo esa ugha gS] D;ksafd mldk mikeu igys gks pqdk gS] vr% vihy Lor% [kkfjt gqbZ ekuh tkosaA 11- fu.kZ; [kqys U;k;ky; esa lquk;k x;kA