Chauthmal Airun Alais Gajanand S/o Late Shri v. Shri Jagdish Prasad Agarwal S/o Shri Narayan

Judgment

1. Shri Jagdish Prasad Agarwal S/o Shri Narayan Agarwal, (Deceased) Through Legal Heirs.

1. Smt. Shanti Devi W/o Late Shri Jagdish Prasad (Deceased) Through Legal Heirs

2. Shri Nar Narayan S/o Late Shri Jagdish Prasad, R/o H. No. 620, Ramdayal Mohalla, Nasirabad, District Ajmer

3. Shri Shayam Narayan S/o Late Shri Jagdish Prasad, R/o H. No. 620, Ramdayal Mohalla, Nasirabad, District Ajmer

4. Shri Braj Narayan S/o Late Shri Jagdish Prasad, R/o 3/29, Ajay Nagar, Housing Board, Ajmer

5. Shri Roopnarayan S/o Late Shri Jagdish Prasad, R/o 248, Opposite Post Office, Subhash Nagar, Ajmer

6. Shri Surnarayan S/o Late Shri Jagdish Prasad, R/o 61/1184, Pratap Nagar Housing Board, Sanganer, Jaipur

7. Shri Varun Narayan S/o Late Shri Jagdish Prasad, R/o 248, Opposite Post Office, Subhash Nagar, Ajmer

8. Smt. Lalita Goyal W/o Shri Banwari Lal D/o Late Shri Jagdish Prasad, R/o Goyal Tent House, Palsaniya Road, Ajmer

9. Smt. Vijay Laxmi Goyal W/o Shri Ashok [2025:RJ-JP:35090] (2 of 6) [CSA-250/2025] Kumar Goyal D/o Late Shri Jagdish Prasad, R/o Goyal Tent House, Palsaniya Road, Ajmer ---Respondents/Plaintiffs

10. Cantonment Board, Through Chief Executive Officer, Cantonment Board Office, Nasirabad, Ajmer ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Rahul Agarwal, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mukesh Pal Jadoun, Adv. Mr. Harshit Kakani, Adv. Mr. Anurag Chahar, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMA SHANKER VYAS Judgment / Order 01/09/2025 vihykFkhZ@izfroknh la[;k&1 ¼ftls vkxs **izfroknh la[;k&1** dgk tk,xk½ }kjk ;g f}rh; vihy vUrxZr /kkjk 100 lh-ih-lh- fo}ku vij ftyk U;k;k/kh'k ulhjkckn] ftyk vtesj }kjk nhokuh fu;fer vihy la[;k 45@2018 esa ikfjr fu.kZ; fnukad 20-02-2015 ls O;fFkr gksdj is'k dh gS ftlds ek/;e ls izfroknh la[;k&1 dh vihy [kkfjt djrs gq, fo}ku ofj"B flfoy U;k;k/kh'k] ulhjkckn }kjk nhokuh okn la[;k 89@2013 esa ikfjr fu.kZ;@fMdzh fnukad 09-01-2017 dh iqf"V dh x;h] ftlds ek/;e ls izR;FkhZ la[;k&1@oknh ¼ftls vkxs **oknh** dgk tk,xk½ dk nkok fMdzh djrs gq, izfroknh la[;k&1 dks lkoZtfud xyh ij 'kkSpky; dk fuekZ.k ugha djus rFkk tks lsQVh Vsad ij gkSn vkfn cuk;s gSa] mUgsa nks ekg [2025:RJ-JP:35090] (3 of 6) [CSA-250/2025] esa gVkdj jkLrs dh Hkwfe dks lery fd;s tkus dk vkns'k fn;k x;k gSA fo}ku vf/koDrk izfroknh la[;k&1 o oknh rFkk izfroknh la[;k&2 dh cgl lquh x;h ,oa vfHkys[k dk voyksdu fd;k x;kA bl izdj.k ds lqlaxr rF; ;g gS fd oknh rFkk izfroknh la[;k&1 nksuksa iMkSlh gS] oknh dk ;g okn jgk gS fd ekSds ij djhc ikap QhV dh xyh gS rFkk ml ij vfrdze.k dj vukf/kd`r :i ls izfroknh la[;k&1 futh 'kkSpky; dk fuekZ.k dk;Z dj jgk gSA izfroknh la[;k&1 us ;g fuekZ.k dk;Z fof/klEer gksuk crk;k gSA fopkj.k U;k;ky; }kjk fook|dks dh fojpuk o fopkj.k ds mijkar ;g fu"d"kZ fn;k fd fookfnr LFky lkoZtfud xyh gs] oknh iMkSlh gS vkSj mijksDr ifjfLFkfr esa izfroknh la[;k&1 dks Hkfo"; esa bl xyh ij fuekZ.k ugha djus rFkk fd;s x;s fuekZ.k dk;Z dks gVkus dk vkKkid O;kns'k fn;k x;kA fo}ku vihyh; U;k;ky; }kjk Hkh fopkj.k U;k;ky; ds fu.kZ; dh iqf"V djrs gq, izfroknh la[;k&1 dh vihy [kkfjt dh x;h ftlls O;fFkr gksdj ;g f}rh; vihy izLrqr dh x;h gSA fo}ku vf/koDrk izfroknh la[;k&1 dk fuosnu gS fd fookfnr LFky lkoZtfud xyh gks] bl ckcr dksbZ lk{; o lkexzh ugha jgh gS] vr% nksuksa U;k;ky;ksa ds fu.kZ; rF;kRed o fof/kd :i ls xaHkhj :i ls =qfVxzLr gSA mudk ;g Hkh [2025:RJ-JP:35090] (4 of 6) [CSA-250/2025] fuosnu gS fd iwoZ esa Hkh nksuksa i{kdkjksa ds chp ,d okn yafcr jgk vkSj fu.khZr gks pqdk gSA blds foijhr fo}ku vf/koDrk izR;FkhZ@oknh dk fuosnu gS fd fookfnr LFky izfroknh la[;k&1 ds vf/kdkjksa dk gksuk izekf.kr ugha gqvk gS] vfirq lkoZtfud xyh gksuk izekf.kr gqvk gSA nksuksa U;k;ky;ksa dk leorhZ fu.kZ; gSA bl ekeys esa ;g fof/kd fcUnq vUrxzZLr ugha gS vkSj var esa vihy [kkfjt fd;s tkus dk fuosnu fd;kA fo}ku fopkj.k U;k;ky; }kjk nksuksa i{kksa dh lk{; ds mijkar ;g fu"d"kZ fn;k gS fd fookfnr LFky lkoZtfud xyh gS] oknh iMkSlh gS vkSj bl xyh ij voS/k :i ls 'kkSpky; dk fuekZ.k izfroknh la[;k&1 }kjk fd;k tkrk gS rks vkokxeu vo:) gksxk rFkk oknh dks U;qlsal Hkh dkfjr gksxkA izfroknh la[;k&1 fookfnr LFky ds laca/k esa viuk dksbZ LokfeRo ugha crk ik;k gSA mijksDr ifjfLFkfr;ksa esa fopkj.k U;k;ky; }kjk fn;k x;k fu"d"kZ lk{; o lkexzh ds foijhr gks vFkok mlds vHkko esa gks] ;g fLFkfr izdV ugha gqbZ gSA fo}ku vihyh; U;k;ky; }kjk Hkh fopkj.k U;k;ky; ds fu"d"kZ dks iq"V fd;k x;k gSA ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; }kjk AIR 2008SC 380 Boodireddy Chandraiah and Ors. Versus ArigelaLaxmi and Ors. ds iSjk la[;k 13 esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us fuEufyf[kr fl)kar izfrikfnr fd;k gS %& "13.The general rule is that High Court will not interfere with concurrent findings of the Courts below.But it is not an absolute rule. Some [2025:RJ-JP:35090] (5 of 6) [CSA-250/2025] of the well recognized exceptions are where (i) the courts below have ignored material evidence or acted on no evidence; (ii) the courts have drawn wrong inferences from proved facts by applying the law erroneously; or(iii) the courts have wrongly cast the burden of proof. When we refer to 'decision based on no evidence', it not only refers to cases where there is a total dearth of evidence, but also refers to any case, where the evidence, taken as a whole, is not reasonably capable of supporting the finding." blh izdkj U;kf;d fu.kZ; AIR 2001 SC 965 Santosh Hazari Versus Purushottam Tiwai (Dead) by L.Rs esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us fuEufyf[kr fl)kar izfrikfnr fd;k gS %& "12. The phrase 'substantial question of law', asoccurring in the amended Section 100 is not definedin the Code. The word substantial, as qualifying' question of law', means – of having substance, essential, real, of sound worth, important or considerable. It is to be understood as something in contradistinction with – technical, of no substance or consequence, or academic merely. However, it is clear that the Legislature has chosen not to qualify the scope of substantial question of law by suffixing the words 'of general importance' as has been done in many other provisions such as Section 109 of the Code or Article 133(1)(a) of the Constitution. The substantial question of law on which a second appeal shall be heard need not necessarily be a substantial question of law of general importance. In Guran Ditta & Anr. Vs. T. Ram Ditta, AIR 1928 [2025:RJ-JP:35090] (6 of 6) [CSA-250/2025] Privy Council 172,the phrase 'substantial question of law' as it was employed in the last clause of the then existing Section 110 of the C.P.C. (since omitted by the Amendment Act, 1973) came up for consideration and Their Lordships held that it did not mean a substantial question of general importance but a substantial question of law which was involved in the case as between the parties. ..." mYys[kuh; gS fd nksuksa gh v/khuLFk U;k;ky;ksa }kjk oknh dk okn fMdzh fd, tkus ds laca/k esa vfHkfyf[kr fu"d"kZ i=koyh ij miyC/k lk{; o lkexzh ij vk/kkfjr gSa vkSj bl laca/k esa muds }kjk lk{; dk lgh ewY;kadu o fo'ys"k.k fd;k x;k gS rFkk fn;s x;s fu"d"kZ esa fdlh izdkj dh dksbZ =qfV ;k izfrdwyrk ugha gSA bl f}rh; vihy esa fof/k dk dksbZ lkjoku iz'u vUrxZLr ugha gS] vr% ,slh fLFkfr esa ;g f}rh; vihy xzg.kkFkZ Lrj ij gh fujLr fd;s tkus ;ksX; gS] tks ,rn~}kjk fujLr dh tkrh gS rFkk fopkj.k U;k;ky; o vihyh; U;k;ky; ds vihyk/khu fu.kZ; dh iqf"V dh tkrh gSA Murari Lal Sharma /85 (UMA SHANKER VYAS),J