Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Rajasthan · body

2025 DAILYLAW 24299 (RAJ)

HANUMAN SON OF LATE DEBURAM v. BANWARI LAL SON OF LATE MALARAM

CW/17220/2017 · 2025-04-15

Sudesh Bansal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

[2025:RJ-JP:16066] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 17220/2017 1. Hanuman Son of Late Deburam, R/o Pathadiya, tehsil Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.) 2. Roshan Lal Son Of Smt. Parvati, Resident Of Pathadiya, Tehsil Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.) ----Petitioner Versus 1. Banwai Lal S/o Late Malaram (Since Deceased) 1/1. 1/2 1/3 1/4 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Bhagwani Devi W/o Late Banwarilal, Chetram S/o Late Banwarilal Shankar Lale S/o Late Banwarilal Pooja D/o Late Banwarilal All R/o Pathadiya, tehsil Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu(Raj) Bajrang Lal S/o Late Malaram, Both R/o Pathadiya, tehsil Chirawa District Jhunjhunu Mst. Bimla Devi Wd/o Mahadaram, Resident Of Pathadiya, Tehsil Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.) Mst. Gudri D/o Mahadaram Ramesh S/o Mahadaram Both R/o Pathadiya, Tehsil Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.) Minor through their natural guardian Mat. Bimla Devi Wd/o Mahadaram Resident Of Pathadiya, Tehsil Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.) Ramniwas S/o Harphool (Since deceased) Mst. Parmeshwari Wd/o Harphool Ramkumar S/o Late Ishar Birbal S/o Late Ishar Dayaram S/o Late Ishar Mst. Dhuma Wd/o Ishar All r/o Pathadiya, Tehsil Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.) 12. 13. 14. 14/1 Hoshiyar Singh Son Of Late Ishar, Resident Of Pathadiya, Tehsil Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.) Mst. Mishri D/o Late Ishar W/o Girdhari, R/o Jakhod, Tehsil Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu (Raj. Mst. Shanti D/o Late Malaram W/o Lichhman, Resident Of Nari, Tehsil Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.) (Since Deceased) Santro D/o Shanti Devi [2025:RJ-JP:16066] (2 of 3) [CW-17220/2017] 14/2 14/3 14/4 14/5 14/6 15 16. 17. 18. 18. Moti D/o Shanti Devi Jamna D/o Shanti Devi Amilal D/o Shanti Devi Man Singh S/o Shanti Devi Manju D/o Shanti Devi All r/o Nari Tehsil Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu Mst. Banarsi D/o Malaram W/o Shishupal, Resident Of Nimad, District Bhiwani (Hariyana) Mst. Sumitra D/o Late Harphool Wife Of Shri Mahaveer, Mst. Meena D/o Late Harphool Wife Of Shri Leelu Ram, Mst. Gyarsi D/o Late Harphool Wife Of Late Ramniwas, All Resident Of Bhagwato Ka Mohalla, Chirawa, Tehsil Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu (Raj.) State of Rajasthan through the Tehsildar, Chirawa, District Jhunjhunu(Raj) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. P L Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Yogendra Singh JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 15/04/2025 1. By way of filing this petition the challenge has been made to the impugned judgments and decrees dated 06.01.2004, 24.07.2006 and 09.06.2017 passed by the Assistant Collector, Jhunjhunu; Revenue Appellate Authority, Jhunjhunu; and Board of Revenue respectively. Perusal of the record indicates that a suit for declaration, permanent injunction and correction of record was submitted by the plaintiffs-respondents Banwari Lal and others against the defendants-petitioners and the same was decreed vide judgment and decree dated 06.01.2004 and the plaintiffs were declared as Khatedar of land in question and defendants were restrained not to interfere with the property in question which [2025:RJ-JP:16066] (3 of 3) [CW-17220/2017] belongs to the plaintiffs. The aforesaid judgment was passed by the revenue court, after appreciating the evidence and perusing the documents available on the record. 2. The aforesaid judgment passed by the revenue court was assailed by the petitioners before two appellate forums i.e. the Revenue Appellate Authority and the Board of Revenue but the same remained unsuccessful. 3. A concurrent finding of fact has been recorded by the two appellate Courts. It is settled proposition of law that while exercising the supervisory jurisdiction contained under Article 227 of Constitution of India the scope of interference of the court is limited. 4. This Court finds no jurisdictional error by the courts below and does not find any perverse findings being recorded by the three Courts below, hence this Court finds no merits and substance in the petition. 5. Accordingly, the same is hereby rejected. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J ashu /14