Rajasthan High Court
CW/16732/2024 of RAMSWAROOP S/O BALARAM Vs RAMNATH S/O BALARAM on 14 August 2026
JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16732/2024 CNR: RJHC020902372024 | URN: CW / 34816U / 2024 Ramswaroop S/o Balaram, Aged About 75 Years, R/o Village Thosdi, Tehsil Raini, District Alwar. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Ramnath S/o Balaram, Aged About 79 Years, R/o
[2026:RJ-JP:32298]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16732/2024
CNR: RJHC020902372024 | URN: CW / 34816U / 2024
Ramswaroop S/o Balaram, Aged About 75 Years, R/o Village Thosdi, Tehsil Raini, District Alwar.
----Petitioner
Versus
1.
Ramnath S/o Balaram, Aged About 79 Years, R/o Village Thosdi, Tehsil Rajgarh.
2.
Ramkishan S/o Balaram, Aged About 73 Years, R/o Village Thosdi, Tehsil Rajgarh.
3.
Ramotar S/o Balaram, Aged About 70 Years, R/o Village Thosdi, Tehsil Rajgarh.
4.
Prakash S/o Balaram, Aged About 60 Years, R/o Village Thosdi, Tehsil Rajgarh.
5.
State of Rajasthan through Tehsildar, Rajgarh.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s)
:
Mr. Anand Sharma for
Mr. Mukesh Pal Jadoun
For Respondent(s)
:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL
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
14/08/2026
1. In the civil suit for declaration and permanent injunction, after framing of issues and at the stage of plaintiff's evidence, petitioner-plaintiff sought to produce an unregistered copy of agreement dated 10.06.1997 along with application under Order 7 Rule 14(3) CPC, which was dismissed with reason that unregistered agreement itself is not admissible in evidence in the present nature of civil suit. Thereagainst, plaintiff filed this writ petition way back on 16.10.2024.
[2026:RJ-JP:32298] (2 of 2) [CW-16732/2024]
2. As per report, during course of writ petition, notices of respondent No.1- Ramnath received unserved with report that he has passed away. This fact was taken on record and brought to the notice of petitioner as per order-sheet dated 03.01.2025 and time was granted to take necessary steps.
3. Till date, even after a lapse of one and half year, no steps have been taken in this regard, therefore, the writ petition deserves to be dismissed for non-prosecution.
4. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed in default and for non-prosecution.
5. Stay application and other pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. (SUDESH BANSAL),J 16/NITIN