[2025:RJ-JP:19502] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 133/2022 Rajasthan Board Of Muslim Waqf, Through Chief Executive Officer, Jaipur Jalebi Chauk, Jaipur, At Present, Near Vidhansabha, Jyoti Nagar. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Aminuddin Khan S/o Moinuddin Khan, Aged About 60 Years, R/o Lalburj Bhairu Gudri Ki Gali, Lal Makan Brijrajpura, Kota. 2. Mohammad Akil S/o Late Jalil Ahmed, Aged About 44 Years, R/o R.a.p.p. Road, Gumanpura, Kota Through To Power Of Attorney Aminuddin Khan S/o Moinuddin Khan, R/o Brijrajpura, Kota (Raj.) 3. Khalil Quareshi S/o Jalil Ahmed, Aged About 39 Years, R/o R.a.p.p. Road, Gumanpura, Kota Through To Power Of Attorney Aminuddin Khan S/o Moinuddin Khan, R/o Brijrajpura, Kota (Raj.) 4. Imtiyaj S/o Late Jalil Ahmed, Aged About 36 Years, R/o R.a.p.p. Road, Gumanpura, Kota Through To Power Of Attorney Aminuddin Khan S/o Moinuddin Khan, R/o Brijrajpura, Kota (Raj.) 5. Mohammad Shabbir S/o Late Sh. Jalil Ahmed, Aged About 35 Years, R/o R.a.p.p. Road, Gumanpura, Kota Through To Power Of Attorney Aminuddin Khan S/o Moinuddin Khan, R/o Brijrajpura, Kota (Raj.) Plaintiffs/Non-Applicants/Respondents 6. Nagar Vikas Nyas, Kota Through Secretary. 7. Nagar Nigam, Kota Through Commissioner. 8. State Of Raj., Through District Collector, Kota. ---Defendants/Proforma-Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Asgar Khan, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Majhar Hussain, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA Judgment Date of Judgment 09/05/2025 The present revision petition has been filed by the petitioner- defendant No.3 (for short ‘the defendant’) under Section 115 CPC [2025:RJ-JP:19502] (2 of 3) [CR-133/2022] against the order dated 01.04.2022 passed by the Civil Judge (South), Kota (for short ‘the trial court’) in Civil Suit No.08/2022, whereby the trial court dismissed the application filed by the defendant under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. Learned counsel for the defendant submits that the respondent Nos.1 to 5/plaintiffs (for short ‘the plaintiffs’) filed a suit for permanent injunction against the defendant as well as proforma defendant Nos.6 to 8 in which the defendant filed an application under order 7 Rule 11 CPC but the trial court vide order dated 01.04.2022 wrongly dismissed the application filed by the defendant. Learned counsel for the defendant further submits that the plaintiff filed the present suit regarding Waqf property. The plaintiff did not send a two months’ notice to the defendant under Section 89 of the WAQF Act, 1995 prior to filing the suit. The plaintiff had not sought any relief regarding declaration. They are not owners of the property in question. Regarding the disputed property, the Waqf Tribunal had already decided the suit against the plaintiffs against which an appeal has been filed in this court which is still pending. So, the present suit is not maintainable but the trial court vide order dated 01.04.2022 dismissed the application filed by the defendant under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. So, the petition filed by the defendant be allowed, order dated 01.04.2022 passed by the trial court be set-aside and the suit filed by the plaintiffs be dismissed. Learned counsel for the plaintiffs has opposed the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the defendant and submitted that the disputed property is not the Waqf property. The Waqf Tribunal [2025:RJ-JP:19502] (3 of 3) [CR-133/2022] while deciding the previous suit, gave liberty to the plaintiffs to file the civil suit before the Civil Court. The plaintiffs had not sought any relief against the Waqf Board, so there was no need to give notice to it. So, the trial court rightly dismissed the application filed by the defendant under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. So, the present petition being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the defendant as well as learned counsel for the plaintiffs. It is a settled position of law that while deciding the application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, only the averments made in the plaint are to be considered. Plaintiffs, in their plaint, clearly mentioned that the disputed property does not belong to the Waqf Board. While deciding the previous suit, the Waqf Tribunal gave liberty to the plaintiffs to file the civil suit. So, in my considered opinion, at this stage, no ground is made out to dismiss the suit filed by the plaintiffs. So, the present petition being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed, which stands dismissed accordingly. Pending application(s), if any, also stand(s), dismissed. However, the defendant is liberty to take all the averments/objections as raised in this petition before the trial court in the written statement and the trial court is directed to decide these objections after evidence of the parties. (NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J Gourav/106