Rajasthan High Court
CCP/1367/2026 of SHRI HARCHAND S/O SHRI LAXMINARAYAN, Vs MOHAR SINGH S/O BANWARI on 20 August 2026
JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 1367/2026 CNR: RJHC020771482026 | URN: CCP / 1427U / 2026 Shri Harchand S/o Shri Laxminarayan, Aged About 75 Years, Resident Of Menas, Tehsil Nawalgarh, District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan. ----Petitioner Versus Mohar Singh S/o
[2026:RJ-JP:33499]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Contempt Petition No. 1367/2026
CNR: RJHC020771482026 | URN: CCP / 1427U / 2026
Shri Harchand S/o Shri Laxminarayan, Aged About 75 Years, Resident Of Menas, Tehsil Nawalgarh, District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan.
----Petitioner
Versus
Mohar Singh S/o Banwari, R/o Menas, Tehsil Nawalgarh, District Jhunjhunu.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s)
:
Mr. Abhay Singh, for
Mr. Prateek Mathur
For Respondent(s)
:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GANESH RAM MEENA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Order
20/08/2026
1. This contempt petition has been filed alleging non- compliance of the order dated 17.08.2022 passed in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10389/2022.
2. By the order dated 17.08.2022, the Court has stayed that operation and effect of the judgment dated 15.06.2022 passed by the Board of Revenue Rajasthan, Ajmer in Revision/TA/8613/ 2018/ Jhunjhunu; Harchand Vs. Mohar Singh, till further orders.
3. A contempt petition under Article 215 of the Constitution of India read with Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, lies in a case where there is disobedience or non-compliance of the specific directions of the Court. In the
[2026:RJ-JP:33499] (2 of 2) [CCP-1367/2026] present case, no specific directions have been issued by this Court by order dated 17.08.2022.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent is acting in furtherance of the directions given by the Board of Revenue, which has already been stayed by this Court.
5. Since there is no specific direction of this Court which is said to be violated. In the opinion of the Court the present contempt petition is not entertainable.
6. Accordingly, the present contempt petition is dismissed.
7. However, the petitioner, if feels that there is violation of any direction given by any other Court, he has liberty to approach concerned Court by making any appropriate application.
(GANESH RAM MEENA),J 43/SHRUTI SHARMA