[2025:RJ-JP:4400] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ,l-ch- flfoy fjV fifV'ku Øekad& 7962/2017 1- izseflag ;kno iq= Jh ukjk;.k yky ;kno] vk;q 50 o"kZ] fuoklh e.Mksyk okMZ] ckjka ftyk ckjka ¼jkt0½ 2- jkeiky eh.kk iq= Jh vejyky eh.kk] vk;q 51 o"kZ] fuoklh ckjka ftyk ckjka ¼jkt0½ &;kfpdkdrkZ@izfroknh dze 4 o 5 cuke 1- Jherh pUnkckbZ iRuh Jh ckcwn;ky] vk;q 87 o"kZ] fuoklh vV: jksM+] ckajk tfj;s eq[rkj gseUr dqekj iq= Jh nkstey] fuoklh nhun;ky ikdZ] ckjka ¼jkt0½ 2- dq'ky mQZ dkS'ky dlsjk] vk;q 35 o"kZ] iq+= Jh jkejru] fuoklh jktiqjk] okMZ ckjka ¼jkt0½ 3- Jherh dkS'kY;k nsoh iRuh Jh ukFkwyky] vk;q 70 o"kZ] fuoklh nhun;ky ikdZ] ckjka ftyk ckjka 4- uxj ifj"kn~ ckjka tfj;s vk;qDr uxj ifj"kn~] ckjka 5- jktLFkku ljdkj tfj;s rglhynkj] ckjka 6- ftrsUnz dqekj iq= Jh vkseizdk'k] vk;q 62 o"kZ] fuoklh vV: jksM+ ckjka] ckjka ¼jkt0½ &vizkFkhZx.k For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Ayushi for Mr. Dharmendra Srivastava For Respondent(s) : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDESH BANSAL Order 31/01/2025 1. Heard counsel for petitioners and perused the record so also the order impugned dated 19.04.2017. [2025:RJ-JP:4400] (2 of 3) [CW-7962/2017] 2. Petitioners are defendants No.4 and 5, who filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC to reject the civil suit No.15/2017 alleging inter alia that the suit property is agricultural in nature, hence, the suit before the Civil Court is barred by virtue of Section 207 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1956. Such application has been dismissed by the Civil Court vide order dated 19.04.2017 with observation that in the plaint, plaintiff has clearly averred that the suit property being Khasra No.718, 982/718 are recorded as Gair Mumkin Abadi in the revenue record and the land bearing Khasra No.1040/719 is situated in the abadi area within the Nagar Palika Kshetra. The trial Court has clearly observed that since both parties have taken contrary stand in respect of nature of suit property, therefore, at this initial stage, same cannot be ascertained and the true nature of the suit property can be adjudicated only after adducing evidence by both the parties, hence, with such observation, the application under Order 7 Rule 11, has been dismissed at the initial stage. 3. This Court finds that the objection raised by the petitioners- defendants has virtually been deferred by the Civil Court to be considered and decided on merits, after recording evidence of parties. Further, the trial Court has observed that in the pleadings of the plaint, the nature of lands in question has been pleaded to be Gair Mumkin Abadi and situated in the abadi Kshetra of Nagar Palika. 4. In that view of matter, the order impugned may not be held to be suffering from any jurisdictional error or vice of arbitrariness, hence, does not warrant any interference by this [2025:RJ-JP:4400] (3 of 3) [CW-7962/2017] Court, in exercise of jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 5. This Court appreciates the manner of arguments made by the counsel appearing for petitioners and on behalf of her Senior Counsel. 6. With the aforesaid observations, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. 7. All pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of. (SUDESH BANSAL),J RONAK JAIMAN/20