Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:32677] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 130/2024
1. Bhagwan Singh S/o Sh. Gopi Ram, Aged About 60 Years, R/o Shyampura Poorvi, Tehsil Dataramgarh, Distt. Sikar (Raj.)
2. Bhagirath S/o Sh. Gopi Ram, Aged About 60 Years, R/o Shyampura Poorvi, Tehsil Dataramgarh, Distt. Sikar (Raj.)
3. Nemichand S/o Sh. Gopi Ram, Aged About 60 Years, R/o Shyampura Poorvi, Tehsil Dataramgarh, Distt. Sikar (Raj.) ----Petitioners/Defendants Versus
1. Mahesh Kumar S/o Shri Purnmal, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Village- Shyampura Poorvi, Tehsil- Dataramgarh, Distt. Sikar (Raj.) -----Respondent/Plaintiff
2. Sagar Mal S/o Shri Narayan, So Called Adopted Son Bhagwana Ram, R/o Village- Shyampura Poorvi, Tehsil- Dataramgarh, Distt. Sikar (Raj.)
3. Gangabaks S/o Shri Bhimvaram, R/o Village- Bhairupura, Tehsil Dhhod, Presently Sikar Rural, Distt. Sikar (Raj.)
4. Assistant Collector-I, Sikar (Raj.)
5. Sub- Divisional Officer, Dataramgarh, Distt. Sikar (Raj.)
6. Up-Tehsildar, Palsana, Tehsil- Dataramgarh, Distt. Sikar (Raj.)
7. Up-Registrar, Palsana, Tehsil- Dataramgarh, Distt. Sikar (Raj.)
8. Patwari Halka, Shyampura, Up-Tehsil, Palsana, Tehsil- Dataramgarh, Distt- Sikar (Raj.) ----Respondents/Defendants For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shiv Charan Gupta Mr. Harsh Saraswat Mr. Tarun Singhal For Respondent(s) : None HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA
Judgment
[2025:RJ-JP:32677] (2 of 3) [CR-130/2024] Date of Judgment :: 22/08/2025 The present revision petition has been filed by the petitioners-defendant Nos.3 to 5 (for short ‘the defendants’) against the order dated 11.01.2024 passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Dantaramgarh, District Sikar (for short ‘the trial court’) in Civil Suit No.165/2023, whereby the trial court dismissed the application filed by the defendants under Order 7 Rule 11 read with Section 151 and 35A CPC.
Learned counsel for the defendants submits that respondent No.1-plaintiff (for short ‘the plaintiff’) filed a suit for declaring the sale deed dated 30.12.2015, 07.07.2014 & 08.02.2023 as null and void and permanent injunction in which defendants filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 read with Section 151 and 35A CPC but trial court vide order dated 11.01.2024 wrongly dismissed the application filed by the defendants. Learned counsel for the defendants also submits that suit filed by the plaintiff is barred by limitation because he has challenged the sale deed dated 07.07.2014 after a lapse of 9 years and plaintiff is not a tenant. So, without declaring the tenancy right, he is not entitled to file the present suit. So, civil court had no jurisdiction to try it. Suit filed by the father of the plaintiff was also dismissed. So, the order dated 11.01.2024 passed by the trial court be set aside.
Learned counsel for the defendants has placed reliance upon the following judgments : (1) Pyarelal Vs. Shubhendra Pilania (Minor) through natural guardian (father) Shri Pradeep Kumar Pilania reported in (2019) 3 SCC 692; (2) Bagaram & Ors. Vs. Balkishan @ Balramkishan & Anr. reported in 2019 (2) WLC (Raj.) UC 551; (3) Rukmani Vs. Bhola & Ors.
[2025:RJ-JP:32677] (3 of 3) [CR-130/2024] reported in 2012(2) WLC (Raj.) 797 and (4) T. Arivandandam Vs. T. V. Satyapal & Anr. reported in AIR 1977 SC 2421. Despite service of notice, none has appeared on behalf of the plaintiff. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the defendants and perused the impugned order. While dismissing the application filed by the defendants, trial court clearly mentioned that while deciding the application under
Order 7 Rule 11 read with Section 151 and 35A CPC only averments of the plaint are to be seen and not the defence of the defendants and objection regarding limitation and jurisdiction are mixed questions of law and fact. So, in my considered opinion, trial court had not committed any error in dismissing the application filed by the defendants. So, the present petition filed by the defendants being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed, which stands dismissed accordingly. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) dismissed.
(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J Jatin/94