[2025:RJ-JP:46075] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 140/2024 In S.B. Civil First Appeal No.313/2017 Thakur Prithvi Singh (Since deceased) through L.Rs 1/1. Kundan Singh Rathore son of Late Shri Prithvi Singh, Aged About 50 Years, resident of 131, Rana Pratap Nagar, Jhotwara, Jaipur ----Appellant/Applicant Versus 1. Thakur Pahap Singh S/o Late Shri Thakur Sardar Singh, A-16-B, Shekhawat Marg, Ambabari, Jaipur Since Deceased 1/1. Smt. Shakuntala W/o Late Shri Pahap Singh, A-16 B, Shekhawat Marg, Ambabari, Jaipur Since Deceased 1/2. Usha Kumari D/o Late Shri Pahap Singh W/o Shri Hanuman Singh Shekhawat, Plot No. 97, Krishna Nagar, Naya Kheda, Gali No.3, Near Ambabari, Jaipur 1/3. Subodh Kumari D/o Late Shri Pahap Singh W/o Shri Surendra Singh, Jawahar Sadan, In Front Of Dhahar Ka Balaji Temple, Chomu Road, Jaipur 1/4. Kuldeep Singh S/o Late Shri Pahap Singh, Plot No. 29, Kailash Nagar, Marg No. 18, Near K.v. No.2, Jhotwara, Jaipur 1/5. Shailendra Singh S/o Late Shri Pahap Singh, A-16 B, Shekhawat Marg, Ambabari, Jaipur Since Deceased 1/6. Indu Kumari D/o Late Shri Pahap Singh W/o Shri Rajendra Singh, C-89, Shekhawat Marg, Ambabari, Jaipur 1/7. Vandana Kumari D/o Late Shri Pahap Singh W/o Shri Sanjeev Singh, Rajendra Marg, Bapu Nagar, Jaipur 2. Thakur Chhatrapal Singh (since deceased) through L.Rs 2/1 Lokendra Singh Son of Thakur Chhatrapal Singh 2/2. Uma Wife of Shri Dalip Singh D/o Chhatrapal Singh Both resident of Plot No. 15, Prithvi Nagar, Naya Kheda, Jaipur 3. Smt. Manju Kanwar wife of Thakur Shri Gopal Singh Nathawat D/o Late Thakur Sardar Singh, Plot No. E-192, [2025:RJ-JP:46075] (2 of 5) [CMAP-140/2024] Shiv Park, In Front Of Panni Ki Tanki, Ambabari, Jaipur ----Respondents 4. Smt. Anju Panwar D/o Late Thakur Prithvi Singh, wife of Shri B.S. Rajput, resident of C-11, Venus Apartment, Near Sandesh Press, SG Highway, Ahmedabad, Bodakdev 380054 5. Dushyant son of Late Smt. Renu D/o Late Thakur Prithvi Singh wife of late Shri Dhanraj Singh resident of A-23, Shri Karni Uma Vihar, Gokulpura, Kalwar Road, Jhotwara, Jaipur ----Performa Respondents For Appellant- Applicant(s) : Ms. Anita Aggarwal with Mr. Laxmikant Tailor For Respondent(s) : Mr. Giriraj Bardhar Mr. Kapil Bardhar Mr. Aayush Sharma HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 27/10/2025 1. Instant Misc. application under Section 151 CPC for recalling the order dated 01.02.2024 is preferred by Applicant (appellant- plaintiff) for re-hearing of S.B. Civil First Appeal No.313/2017. 2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of appellant-applicant submitted that they have preferred an appeal aggrieved from judgment dated 31.01.2017 in Civil Suit No.32/2012 (43/2005) passed by learned Additional District Judge No. 14, Jaipur Metropolitan but the first appeal was disposed of by Hon’ble this Court on the ground that the appeal has lost its relevance and same is unnecessarily being continued despite subsequent events. She further submitted that the material placed by respondents with the contention that the parties have settled their dispute and a compromise is entered between them, which is wholly [2025:RJ-JP:46075] (3 of 5) [CMAP-140/2024] erroneous. She further referred page 21 of impugned judgment and submitted that the issue is still surviving and in case the appeal is not restored to its original number, they will suffer adversely, therefore, the application for recall be allowed and the appeal be restored to its original number. 3. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned counsel for the respondents on the ground that the appellant is just pursuing dead horse and the things have already been settled. He further submitted that after compromise the possession has already been handed over and the appellant has no right to pursue the appeal. He submitted that the appeal has already been rendered infructuous and restoration would unnecessarily create harassment to respondents. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material placed on record. 5. The plaintiff Thakur Prithvi Singh has filed a suit for partition and permanent injunction before learned District Judge, Jaipur City, which was transferred and decided by learned Additional District Judge No.14, Jaipur Metropolitan on 31.01.2017. The trial Court has dismissed the suit observing that earlier a Civil Suit No.509/2003 was filed and the issues are common. The trial Court has opined that Thakur Prithvi Singh is residing under a license from Pahap Singh (defendant). After dismissal of civil suit, a first appeal is preferred before this Court under Section 96 of CPC and on 08.12.2023, the counsel for the respondents has submitted that the appeal has rendered infructuous. Even prior to said date, [2025:RJ-JP:46075] (4 of 5) [CMAP-140/2024] the fact of compromise is brought on record and matter was fixed for 31.03.2023. 6. On 01.02.2024, this Court has considered submissions of learned counsel for the respondents and despite request for time by the counsel for the appellant, as no further material is placed on record, the Court observing that the appeal has lost its relevance has dismissed the appeal. The order is reproduced as under:- “Learned counsel for respondents submitted that the parties have entered into a compromise and in pursuant to compromise the possession of the suit property was handed over to the respondents, therefore, nothing survives in this appeal. A perusal of record indicated that an additional affidavit along with compromise and the document regarding handing over of possession was filed supported with copy of order-sheet dated 15.05.2017 of learned Trial Court a request was made to the Court to take all these facts on record. On 31.03.2023, learned counsel for appellant sought time to verify the compromise deed and delivery of possession and since then we are exactly after ten months. Aforesaid indicate that the appeal has lost his relevance and it is unnecessarily been continued despite subsequent events. Hence, the appeal is dismissed. Misc. application, if any, stands disposed of.” 7. Since the appeal is filed under Section 96 of CPC and now the counsel for the applicant-appellant while referring judgment dated 31.01.2017 has seriously raised an issue and adjudication, therefore, considering aforesaid submissions, it is appropriate to recall the order and re-register the appeal for consideration on [2025:RJ-JP:46075] (5 of 5) [CMAP-140/2024] merits as Section 96 of CPC enables to consider the appeal not only on legal issue but also on factual grounds. 8. In view of the discussion made hereinabove, the order dated 01.02.2024 is hereby recalled and S.B. Civil First Appeal No.313/2017 is restored to its original number. 9. Office is directed to re-register S.B. Civil First Appeal No.313/2017 and list it before the appropriate roster. 10. Misc. application stands disposed. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J MR/145