[2025:RJ-JP:38170] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 14110/2025 1. Dinesh S/o Bherulal, Aged About 25 Years, Resident Of Kasba Niwai, Tehsil Niwai, District Tonk. 2. Nathu Lal S/o Bheru Lal, Aged About 45 Years, Resident Of Kasba Niwai, Tehsil Niwai, District Tonk. 3. Smt. Durga W/o Bheru Lal, Aged About 62 Years, Resident Of Kasba Niwai, Tehsil Niwai, District Tonk. 4. Smt. Anita D/o Behru Lal Wife Of Dhanna Lal, Aged About 40 Years, Resident Of Kasba Niwai, Tehsil Niwai District Tonk At Present Residing Sarsoap, Tehsil Chouth Ka Barwada, District Sawai Madhopur. 5. Smt. Asha D/o Bheru Lal Wife Of Shankar, Aged About 35 Years, Resident Of Kasba Niwai, Tehsil Niwai, District Tonk. At Present Residing Village Soda, Tehsil Malpura, District Tonk. 6. Suman D/o Bheru Lal Wife Of Mukesh, Aged About 33 Years, Resident Of Kasba Niwai, Tehsil Niwai, District Tonk. At Present Residing Sarsoap, Tehsil Chouth Ka Barwada, District Sawai Madhopur. ----Petitioners Versus 1. Jagdish S/o Ramkishore, Aged About 42 Years, Resident Of Keer Colony, Kasba Niwai, Tehsil Niwai, District Tonk (Raj.) 2. Suresh S/o Ramkishore, Aged About 35 Years, Resident Of Keer Colony, Kasba Niwai, Tehsil Niwai, District Tonk (Raj.) 3. Jagdishi D/o Ramkishore W/o Mukesh, Aged About 38 Years, Resident Of Keer Colony, Kasba Niwai, Tehsil Niwai, District Tonk, (Raj.) At Present Resident Of Siwad, Tehsil Chouth Ka Barwada, District Sawai Madhopur. 4. Kailashi W/o Ramkishore, Aged About 70 Years, Resident Of Keer Colony, Kasba Niwai, Tehsil Niwai, District Tonk (Raj.) 5. Tehsildar, Tehsil Niwai, District Tonk. 6. Sub Registrar, Niwai, District Tonk. [2025:RJ-JP:38170] (2 of 3) [CW-14110/2025] ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Dharmendra Sharma Mr. Rakesh Saini For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN Judgment 18/09/2025 1. Learned counsel for the petitioners has challenged order dated 14.08.2025 passed in Appeal No.148/2025 by the Court of Land Officer and Revenue Appellate Authority, Tonk. In the said appeal the petitioners herein have challenged the order dated 12.08.2025. 2. The said findings of the learned Trial Court reflects that it is an order passed after recording due consent of the parties. Howsoever, it is contended that the primary challenge made herein is upon the said consent order being fallacious and that the same was not passed with due consent of the parties therein. It is also contended that the said order was passed without drawing any signatures. Thence, it can be deduced that the same is not an order passed after due consensus of the parties. 3. Having heard the aforementioned, and upon a perusal of the material available on record it is noted that the learned Trial Court had set aside the said order and directed that the matter be remanded back for adjudication, which shall be done within a period of thirty days. Therefore, taking note of the fact that the said order is passed after an assiduous consideration of the material facts and the consent of the parties therein, this Court [2025:RJ-JP:38170] (3 of 3) [CW-14110/2025] finds no perversity in the said order. The operative portion of the impugned order reads as under: ** fo}ku vfHkHkk"kdx.kksa ds dFkuksa ij fopkj fd;k x;k] i=koyh dk voyksdu fd;k x;kA vf/koDrk izkFkhZ ,oa vizkFkhZ dh lgefr ds vk/kkj ij i=koyh esa fnukad 07-05-2024 dks tkjh ,drjQk vUrfje vLFkkbZ fu"ks/kkKk esa vkaf'kd la'kks/ku djrs gq;s rglhynkj fuokbZ dks fooknxzLr vkjkft;kr esa] LoxhZ; Jh HkS:yky iq= X;kjlk ds gd o fgLls dh Hkwfe dk fojklr dk ukekUrdj.k ntZ djus dh vuqefr iznku dh tkrh gSA 'ks"k LFkxu vkns'k ;Fkkor j[kk tkrk gSA** 4. In view of the above, the instant petition is dismissed. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of. (SAMEER JAIN),J JKP/9