Rajasthan High Court
CMA/762/2009 of GIRDHARI AND ORS Vs KALYAN PRASAD AND ORS on 10 July 2026
JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 762/2009 URN: CMA / 951U / 2009 1. Girdhari son of kajodiya 2. Ramkesh son of balya 3. Harkesh son of balya 4. Pankhi son of Pahalwan All resident of Jiwali, Tehsil Gangapur city, District Sawai Madhopur (Rajasthan)
[2026:RJ-JP:25985]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 762/2009
URN: CMA / 951U / 2009
1. Girdhari son of kajodiya
2. Ramkesh son of balya
3. Harkesh son of balya
4. Pankhi son of Pahalwan
All resident of Jiwali, Tehsil Gangapur city, District Sawai Madhopur (Rajasthan)
----Appellant
Versus
1. Kalyan Prasad son of Brijwasi, resident of Ridayal Gurjar, Tehsil Gangapur city, District Sawai Madhopur (Rajasthan)
2. Land Holder, Tehsildar, Tehsil Gangapur city, District Sawai Madhopur (Rajasthan)
----Respondent
For Appellant(s)
:
Mr. Rahul Sharma for
Mr. Rajneesh Gupta
For Respondent(s)
:
Mr. Himmat Singh
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
10/07/2026
1. By way of filling instant appeal, petitioners-plaintiffs challenged an order dated 25.11.2008 passed by the Additional District Judge, Gangapur city, Sawai madhopur, dismissing an application filed by petitioners-plaintiffs, seeking temporary injunction.
2. Counsel for petitioners states during course of present appeal, the original suit before the trial Court has been decided, therefore, in that view, the challenge to the order dated
[2026:RJ-JP:25985] (2 of 2) [CMA-762/2009] 25.11.2008 made in the present petition, has rendered infructuous. The factum of the civil suit having been decided, stands proved by the copy of judgment dated 30.05.2026, produced by counsel for respondents.
3. In view of the above, the appeal is disposed of as having become infructuous.
4. Pending application(s), if any, also also stand disposed of.
5. Record of trial Court be sent back. (SUDESH BANSAL),J Sachin Sharma/58