SMT.SAROJ W/O MAHESH JANGID v. NEMI CHAND SAHU SON OF SHRI BHAGWANARAM SAHU
CR/7/2021 · 2025-07-15
Narendra Singh Dhaddha
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 2283 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 2283 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2025:RJ-JP:26127] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 7/2021
1. Smt.saroj W/o Mahesh Jangid, R/o Village Post Tamkor, Malsisar, District Jhunjhunu Rajasthan Mob No. 9772123614, Presently Residing At Plot No. S-329, 4-S Scheme, Lohamandi Road Machda, Jaipur.
2. Dinesh Jangid Son Of Not Known, R/o Plot No. 169, Shiv Nagar First, Sikar Road, Jaipur Mob. No. 7737585747
3. Sonu W/o Shri Ramesh Goswami Alias Mahesh Swami, R/o Plot No. A10/4C, Jamnapuri Murlipura Scheme, Jaipur.
4. Sandeep Swami Son Of Shri Govind Swami M/s Hardware Zone Shop, Near Agrawal Hardware And Sanatary Store, Road No. 2, Main Sikar Road, Jaipur Mob. No. 9509596144 ----Petitioners/Defendant Nos. 1 to 4 Versus
1. Nemi Chand Sahu Son Of Shri Bhagwanaram Sahu, R/o 36/d Pocket A (Sfs) Mayur Vihar Phase 3, Naya Kondli, Delhi State Presently Through Power Of Attorney Holder Shri Neeraj Kumar Kaswa Son Of Shri Rameshwar Singh R/o House No. 58, Jamnapuri, Murlipura Scheme, Jaipur. ---Respondent/Plaintiff
2. Jaipur Development Authority, Deputy Commissioner, Zone-6, Jaipur ----Proforma Respondent/Defendant No.5 For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashish Sharma For Respondent(s) : None HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA
Judgment Date of Judgment: :: 15/07/2025 This revision petition has been filed by the petitioners- defendant Nos. 1 to 4 (for short ‘the defendants’) under Section
[2025:RJ-JP:26127] (2 of 3) [CR-7/2021] 115 CPC against the order dated 21.09.2020 passed by Additional Chief Judge No.17, Jaipur Metro-II Headquarter Chomu (for short ‘the trial court’) in Civil Suit No.51/2020 whereby the trial court dismissed the application filed by the defendants under Order 7 Rule 11 read with Section 151 CPC.
Learned counsel for the defendants submits that the respondent No.1-plaintiff (for short ‘the plaintiff’) filed a suit for permanent and mandatory injunction against the defendants and respondent No.2- JDA mentioning therein that the defendants are raising construction in violation of the permission given to them. They had not left set back and wanted to raise commercial construction which is not permissible. The defendants filed an application before the trial Court under Order 7 Rule 11 read with Section 151 CPC to the effect that to try the suit, JDA Tribunal had power and civil court had no jurisdiction but the trial Court vide order dated 21.09.2020 dismissed the application filed by the defendants.
Learned counsel for the defendants further submits that issue with regard to the violation of the permission regarding construction is to be decided by the Tribunal and not by the civil court. So, the order dated 21.09.2020 passed by the trial Court be set aside and the suit filed by the plaintiff be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Learned counsel for the defendants has placed reliance upon the judgment passed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of ‘Rohit Singh Vs. Vishambhar Dayal Shukla’, reported in 2014(2) RLW 1367 (Raj.) and in the case of ‘Anand Kumar Sharma
[2025:RJ-JP:26127] (3 of 3) [CR-7/2021] Vs. JDA Appellate Tribunal and Ors.’, reported in 2010(2) ILR (Raj.) 241. No one has put in appearance for the plaintiff. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the defendants and perused the impugned order. It is an admitted position that by way of present suit, plaintiff sought relief before the trial Court regarding construction in violation of the permission. So, in my considered opinion, JDA Tribunal had power to adjudicate the said suit and not the civil court. So, learned trial Court has committed an error in dismissing the application filed by the defendants under Order 7 Rule 11 read with Section 151 CPC. So, the revision petition filed by the defendants deserves to be allowed. The Civil Revision Petition filed by the defendants is allowed. The order dated 21.09.2020 passed by the trial court is set-aside and the suit filed by the plaintiff is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. Pending application(s), if any, also stand(s), disposed of.
(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J Ritu84