HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 177/2023 1. Senior Manager, Gail Operations And Maintenance, Office At R.r.v.u.n.l Power Plant, Near Old Cantonment, Dholpur (Rajasthan). 2. Deputy General Manager (Gail Tel), Registered Office At Gail Bhawan, 16 Bhikaji Cama Palace, New Delhi - 110066, India. ----Petitioners-Defendants Versus 1. Smt. Suman Kumari W/o Bidharam, Aged About 59 Years, R/o Madina Colony, Tehsil And District - Dholpur (Rajasthan). 2. Smt. Mundradevi W/o Sh. Murarilal, Aged About 58 Years, R/o Madina Colony, Tehsil And District - Dholpur (Rajasthan). ----Respondents-Plaintiffs For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sandeep Singh Shekhawat, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anil Jain, Adv. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA Judgment Date of Judgment 09/07/2025 The present revision petition has been filed by the petitioners-defendants (for short ‘the defendants’) under Section 115 CPC against the order dated 26.07.2023 passed by the Additional Civil Judge, District Dholpur (for short ‘the trial court’) in Civil Suit No.40/2023, titled as “Suman Kumari & Anr. Vs. Senior Manager Gail & Anr.” whereby the trial court dismissed the application filed by the defendants under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. Learned counsel for the defendants submits that the respondents-plaintiffs (for short ‘the plaintiffs’) filed a suit for permanent injunction against the defendants praying therein that the defendants be restrained to create any hindrance in digging (2 of 3) [CR-177/2023] out the borewell in the disputed land nor to interfere in the use of the land in question in any manner. Learned counsel for the defendants further submits that the defendants filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC before the trial court to the effect that as per Section 14 of the Petroleum and Minerals Pipelines (Acquisition of Right of User in Land) Act, 1962 (for short ‘the Act of 1962’), the plaintiffs had no right to file the civil suit against the defendants before the Civil Court but the trial court vide order dated 26.07.2023 wrongly dismissed the application filed by the defendants. Learned counsel for the defendants also submits that as per Section 5 of the Act of 1962, the plaintiffs had right to file their objections before the Competent Court and as per Section 12 of the Act of 1962, Competent Authority has power to act as a civil court. So, the present suit filed by the plaintiffs is barred by law. So, the petition filed by the defendants be allowed, order dated 26.07.2023 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 defendants and submitted that the trial court vide order dated 26.07.2023 rightly dismissed the application filed by the defendants because as per averments of the plaint, land of the plaintiffs was never acquired and no compensation was granted to them. So while deciding the application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC only averments of the plaint is to be seen and defence of the defendants is not to be considered. So, the present petition being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed. (3 of 3) [CR-177/2023] I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the defendants as well as learned counsel for the plaintiffs. Section 14 of the Act of 1962 reads as under:- “Bar of jurisdiction of civil courts-Save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, no civil court shall have jurisdiction in respect of any matter which the competent authority is empowered by or under this Act to determine and no injunction shall be granted by any court or other authority in respect of any action taken or proposed to be taken in pursuance of any power conferred by or under this Act” A perusal of the plaint reveals that the plaintiffs filed the present suit for restraining the defendants, who are engaged in the operations of Oil and Gas by way of pipelines. As per Section 14 of the Act of 1962, the Civil Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the present suit. Section 5 of the Act of 1962, clearly stated that the Competent Authority has power to hear the objections and it can act as a civil court. So, in my considered opinion, the trial court has committed an error in entertaining the present suit which is barred by law. So, the present revision petition filed by the defendants deserves to be allowed. The Civil Revision Petition filed by the defendants is allowed. The order dated 26.07.2023 passed by the trial court is set-aside and the suit filed by the plaintiffs is dismissed being barred by law. Pending application(s), if any, also stand(s), disposed of. (NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J Gourav/94