[2025:RJ-JP:29658] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 90/2020 Preetam Singh S/o Shri Charan Singh, R/o House No. C-58, Talwandi, Kota. ----Petitioner/Defendant No.1 Versus 1. Smt. Rekha Jain W/o Shri Neeraj Jain, R/o House No. 57, Main Road, Chawani Kota, District Kota, Raj. ---Respondent/Plaintiff 2. Nawal Kishore Maheshwari S/o Shri Gulab Chand Ji Maheshwari, R/o House No. 192, Shakti Nagar, Dadabadi, Kota. 3. Mahendra Gautam S/o Shri Radhakishan Ji, R/o 4-A, New Dhanmandi , Kota. 4. Nagar Vikas Nyas Kota Through Secretary Nagar Vyas Nyas, Kota ----Proforma Respondents/Defendants Nos. 2, 3 and 4 For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Samarth Sharma For Respondent(s) : None HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA Judgment Date of Judgment :: 05/08/2025 The present revision petition has been filed by the petitioner- defendant No.1 (for short ‘the defendant’) under Section 115 CPC against the order dated 18.09.2020 passed by the Additional Civil Judge No.1, (North) Kota (for short ‘the trial court’) in Civil Suit No.56/2020, whereby the trial court dismissed the application filed by the defendant under Order 7 Rule 11 read with Section 151 CPC and Section 207 of Rajasthan Tenancy Act. Learned counsel for the defendant submits that respondent No.1-plaintiff (for short ‘the plaintiff’) filed a suit against the [2025:RJ-JP:29658] (2 of 3) [CR-90/2020] defendant as well as defendant Nos. 2 to 4 for mandatory and permanent injunction in which the defendant filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 read with Section 151 CPC and Section 207 of Rajasthan Tenancy Act but the trial Court vide order dated 18.09.2020 dismissed the application filed by the defendant. Learned counsel for the defendant submits that plaintiff filed the suit with regard to the land bearing khasra No. 762/387, 0.80 hectare. Learned counsel for the defendant submits that the disputed land is an agricultural land, so civil court has no jurisdiction. For the land mentioned in the suit, plaintiff had filed a suit before the Sub-Divisional Officer, Kota for demarcation against the defendant, which is pending there. So, the suit with regard to agricultural land is not maintainable before the trial Court but the trial Court had committed an error in dismissing the application filed by the defendant. So, the petition filed by the defendant be allowed, order dated 18.09.2020 passed by the trial court be set- aside and the suit filed by the plaintiff be dismissed. No one has put in appearance for the plaintiff. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the defendant and perused the impugned order. It is an admitted position that plaintiff filed the suit with regard to agricultural land and sought the relief for mandatory and permanent injunction. So, in my considered opinion, trial Court had committed an error in entertaining the present suit because Revenue Court had jurisdiction to try the matter regarding agricultural land. So, the revision petition filed by the defendant deserves to be allowed. [2025:RJ-JP:29658] (3 of 3) [CR-90/2020] The Civil Revision Petition filed by the defendant is allowed. The order dated 18.09.2020 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 Ritu/54