HEMANT KRISHAN VIJAYVARGIYA ADVOCATE SON OF SHRI DAYA KRISHAN JI v. URBAN IMPROVEMENT TRUST
CW/24687/2018 · 2025-01-30
Sudesh Bansal
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 34192 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 34192 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:4196] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 24687/2018 Hemant Krishan Vijayvargiya Advocate Son Of Shri Daya Krishan Ji, Aged About 52 Years, Resident Of 228-B, Civil Lines, Kota, Tehsil And District Kota (Rajasthan) ----Petitioner Versus Urban Improvement Trust, Kota Through Its Secretary, CAD Circle, Kota (Rajasthan) ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rahul Sharma for Mr. Rajneesh Gupta For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order 30/01/2025
1. Petitioner-plaintiff has preferred this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, impugning the order dated 28.09.2018 passed by the Additional Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate No.1, (South) Kota, allowing withdrawal of his Civil Suit No.93/2013, but permission to file a fresh suit has not been granted.
2. Having argued the writ petition, counsel for petitioner submits that the application for withdrawal was filed by the petitioner-plaintiff in order to deposit the allotment amount of plot in question before the UIT, however, a prayer was made to grant liberty for filing a fresh suit, which has not been granted by the trial Court.
3. Having considered the entirety of facts and circumstances, counsel for petitioner, having instructions from petitioner, who is an Advocate, seeks permission to withdraw the writ petition.
4. In view of above, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
5. Stay application and any other pending application, if any, stand disposed of.
(SUDESH BANSAL),J NITIN /18