RAJENDRA PRASAD vs GOVIND PRASAD, — 2/2016
Case under C.p.c Section O41R1. Disposed: Contested--Remanded on 22nd April 2026.
C.APPLN.
CNR: RJAJ170000462016
Filing Number
69/2016
Filing Date
01-02-2016
Registration No
2/2016
Registration Date
01-02-2016
Court
ADJ KISHANGARH TALUKA
Judge
2-Addl District and Sessions Judge II
Decision Date
22nd April 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Remanded
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
RAJENDRA PRASAD
Adv. MAHESH AGARWAL
Respondent(s)
GOVIND PRASAD,
Hearing History
Judge: 2-Addl District and Sessions Judge II
Disposed
Arguments on Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings
Arguments on Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings
Arguments on Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings
Arguments on Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 22-04-2026 | Disposed |
| 21-04-2026 | Arguments on Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings |
| 20-04-2026 | Arguments on Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings |
| 18-04-2026 | Arguments on Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings |
| 13-04-2026 | Arguments on Applications / Arguments in Misc. Proceedings |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: Rajendra Prasad v. Govind Prasad (CIS No. 02/2016) The appellate court set aside the lower court's decree that had granted Govind Prasad (now deceased) exclusive rights to perform temple worship at Sri Radhanagar Temple on a rotational basis with compensation of Rs. 3,000. The appellate court found the lower court's judgment procedurally defective because: (1) a critical party—Damodar Sharan/Devendra Kumar, who allegedly performed the actual worship—was not made a party despite being identified as essential; (2) the temple deity and Devasthan Department were not impleased despite their legal necessity; and (3) the written agreement cited lacked proper documentary support. The court remitted the case to the trial court with directions to add Damodar Sharan as a party, re-frame issues, and afford full hearing before deciding on petitioner's right to rotate temple worship duties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: Rajendra Prasad v. Govind Prasad (CIS No. 02/2016) The appellate court set aside the lower court's decree that had granted Govind Prasad (now deceased) exclusive rights to perform temple worship at Sri Radhanagar Temple on a rotational basis with compensation of Rs. 3,000. The appellate court found the lower court's judgment procedurally defective because: (1) a critical party—Damodar Sharan/Devendra Kumar, who allegedly performed the actual worship—was not made a party despite being identified as essential; (2) the temple deity and Devasthan Department were not impleased despite their legal necessity; and (3) the written agreement cited lacked proper documentary support. The court remitted the case to the trial court with directions to add Damodar Sharan as a party, re-frame issues, and afford full hearing before deciding on petitioner's right to rotate temple worship duties. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts