TMI Blog2020 (5) TMI 565X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, i.e., in the absence of any assertion of facts, regarding the alleged construction activities, the exact nature thereof and the manner in which the applicant obtained knowledge. Allowing such an application would amount to allowing the applicant to indulge in forum shopping, which has, from time immemorial, been deprecated. Application dismissed. - C.As. 254-55/2020 IN CO.PET. 265/1998 - - - Dated:- 18-5-2020 - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR Petitioner Through: None Respondent Through: None Applicant Through: Mr. Rishabh Jain, Adv. for the applicant along with Mr. Dheeraj Gupta, Representative on behalf of the petitioner Mr. Kunal Sharma, Adv. for the Official Liquidator O R D E R CA 255/2020 (exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application is disposed of. CM 254/2020 in CO.PET. 265/1998 1. This matter has been taken up for hearing by video conferencing, consequent to listing thereof having allowed by the Registrar. 2. The prayer clause, in this application, reads thus: That in view of the above-state submissions, and with the lone intention to prevent denial and failure of justice, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 19 when the OL. dispossessed the applicant/his tenants, and as it is on date. OR (c) Allow the applicant to resume his possession (in terms of the established revenue records) of the subject lands as it was prior to August 2019, and enable him to protect his lands himself while binding him to conditions as deemed fit by this Hon 'ble Court. OR/AND (d) Pass any other and further orders that this Hon 'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the present case. 8. Mr. Rishabh Jain, learned counsel appearing for the applicant candidly acknowledges that prayer (a) of the present application was also one of the prayers in CA 198/2020. However, he submits that the said prayer was not disposed of on merits, and that in the circumstances, the present application would be maintainable. He relies, for the said purpose, on Arjun Singh v. Mohindra Kumar And Others AIR 1964 SC 993. 9. The prayer to place on record, the physical condition and status of the lands, over which the applicant claims a right, as urged in the aforesaid CA 198/2020, was rejected, by a Coordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 24th April, 2020. Paras 6 and 7 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o assertion of specific facts regarding the alleged construction activities on the subject lands, the exact thereof or the manner in which the applicant obtained knowledge. Even so, he submits that he has a right to protect these lands, in view of the law laid down Arjun Singh1, the present application is maintainable. 12. Besides, submits Mr. Jain, payers (b) and (c) in the present application were not subject matter of CA 198/2020. 13. I have heard Mr. Jain at length, and considered the application on its merits. 14. It defies comprehension as to how, in the face of the order, dated 24th April, 2020, and the observations entered, by this Court, in para 7 thereof, the applicant could maintain yet another application, with the very same prayer, without curing the defects/defaults highlighted in para 7 of the said order. 15. Mr. Rishabh Jain places special reliance on para 14 of the judgment in Arjun Singh1, which reads thus: 14. It is needless to point out that interlocutory orders are of various kinds; some like orders of stay, injunction or receiver are designed to preserve the status quo pending the litigation and to ensure that the parties might not be prejudic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e disallowed by the court does not however necessarily rest on the principle of res-judicata. Thus if an application for the adjournment of a suit is rejected, a subsequent application for the same purpose even if based on the same facts, is not barred on the application 'of any rule of res judicata, but would be rejected for the same grounds on which the original application was refused. The principle underlying the distinction between the rule of res judicata and a rejection on the ground that no new facts have been adduced to justify a different order is vital. If the principle of res-judicata is applicable to the decision on a particular issue of fact, even if fresh facts were placed before the Court, the bar would continue to operate and preclude a fresh investigation of the issue, whereas in the other case, on proof of fresh facts, the court would be competent, nay,, would be bound to take those into account and make an order conformably to the facts freshly brought before the court. 17. In my view, reliance on the decision of Arjun Singh1, by the counsel for the applicant, is completely misplaced. There is no question, here, of application of the principle of res ju ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ially, abusive of the process of law. It cannot, therefore, be granted. 21. In so far as prayers (b) and (c) in the application are concerned, once prayer (a) in the application stands rejected, there is no question of entertaining prayer (b), which seeks placing, on record by the Official Liquidator, a report containing complete details and lists of all khasras/lands where security guards were placed in August, 2019 in Village Hasanpur Masoori, Tehsil Khekra, District Baghpat, Uttar Pradesh. This plea, again, appears to be an attempt, of the applicant, to obtain, with his left hand, what he could not obtain with his right. The applicant s concern is with respect to the subject lands and not with respect to the other lands in Village Hasanpur Masoori, Tehsil Khekra, District Baghpat, Uttar Pradesh. No occasion, therefore, arises to direct the Official Liquidator to file any report containing complete details and lists of all khasras/lands where security guards were placed in August, 2019 in Village Hasanpur Masoori, Tehsil Khekra, District Baghpat, Uttar Pradesh. 22. Prayer (c), in the application, is essentially a follow up to prayer (a) as it also seeks placing, on record, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
