Rajasthan High Court
CW/8198/2026 of BHAGWANDAS S/O BABULAL Vs SHIVCHARAN S/O SHRI KALLURAM on 2 July 2026
JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8198/2026 URN: CW / 18021U / 2026 Bhagwandas S/o Babulal, R/o Near Ashok Takiz, Hanuman Temple, Alwar. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Shivcharan S/o Shri Kalluram, Aged About 48 Years, R/o Village Mannotkalan Tehsil Nagar District
[2026:RJ-JP:24524]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8198/2026
URN: CW / 18021U / 2026
Bhagwandas S/o Babulal, R/o Near Ashok Takiz, Hanuman Temple, Alwar.
----Petitioner
Versus
1.
Shivcharan S/o Shri Kalluram, Aged About 48 Years, R/o Village Mannotkalan Tehsil Nagar District Bharatpur.
2.
Smt. Uttara W/o Punamchand Sharma, Aged About 42
Years, R/o House No. 1 P 4 Stc Housing Board, Bharapur.
3.
Omprakash Adopted Son Of Balakdas Sharma, R/o Near Ashok Takiz Hanuman Temple Alwar (Deceased)
3/1.
Sanjay Alias Tiger, Aged About 49 Years, S/o Late Omprakash 3/2.
Raju Alias Rajkumar, Aged About 45 Years, S/o Late Omprakash 3/3.
Sunil S/o Late Omprakash, Aged About 43 Years, All Are R/o Near Ashok Takiz Hanuman Temple Alwar.
3/4.
Kusumlata Alias Gauri W/o Mukesh Kumar, R/o Village Kasoda Tehsil Sab Tehsil Jalsu District Bharatpur Raj.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s)
:
Mr. Yogesh Pujari for
Mr. D.P. Pujari
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
02/07/2026
1. Petitioner filed instant writ petition, challenging the order dated 11.03.2026 passed by the Court of Senior Civil Judge and Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alwar, dismissing his application filed under Order 21 Rule 90 CPC.
2. Counsel for petitioner states that during course of present petition, execution proceedings have been finally culminated and decree has been executed, hence, the challenge made in the writ
[2026:RJ-JP:24524] (2 of 2) [CW-8198/2026] petition has rendered infructuous, therefore, petitioner does not want to press this writ petition on merits and seeks permission to withdraw the same.
3. Permission is granted.
4. Accordingly, the present writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
5. Stay application and pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of. (SUDESH BANSAL),J Sachin Sharma/ 6