// 1 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3590/2008 Smt. Sanjana Devi W/o late Shri Hari Ram Bhadu Versus Additional District Judge No.1, Jaipur District, Jaipur and Others Date of Order ::: 29.07.2008 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Narendra Kumar Jain Shri R.K. Daga, counsel for petitioner Shri B.D. Agarwal, Counsel for respondents #### By the Court:- Admit. Heard learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition, on behalf of the plaintiff, is directed against the impugned order dated 29th March, 2008, whereby the trial court allowed the application filed on behalf of the defendants No.2 and 3 under Order 14 Rule 5 CPC and deleted the Issues No.3 and 4. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties in the light of reasons assigned by the trial court in the impugned order dated 29th March, 2008 for deleting the Issues No.3 and 4 and, after considering the same, I do not find any illegality, perversity or jurisdictional error in the said order so as to interfere with the // 2 // same. There is no merit in this writ petition and the same is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs. (Narendra Kumar Jain) J. //Jaiman// // 3 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Misc. Stay Appl. No.760/2008 In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3590/2008 Smt. Sanjana Devi W/o late Shri Hari Ram Bhadu Versus Additional District Judge No.1, Jaipur District, Jaipur and Others Date of Order ::: 29.07.2008 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Narendra Kumar Jain Shri R.K. Daga, counsel for petitioner Shri B.D. Agarwal, Counsel for respondents #### By the Court:- Consequent upon dismissal of the writ petition itself, the stay application, filed therewith, does not survive and the same is also dismissed. (Narendra Kumar Jain) J. //Jaiman//