[2025:RJ-JP:43053-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 1001/2025 1. Jagannath (Deceased) S/o Shri Mathura Lal, Through Legal Representative. 1/1. Nand Bihari Gautam S/o Shri Jagannath, Aged about 49 years, R/o Village Morana, Tehsil Deegod, District Kota (Raj.) ----Appellants Versus 1. Board Of Revenue, Ajmer (Raj.) 2. Smt. Mohini Bai D/o Shri Prabhu Lal W/o Shri Babu Lal, Aged About 89 Years, R/o Village Morana, Tehsil Deegod, District Kota (Raj.). 3. State Of Rajasthan, Through Sdm, Kota (Raj.) 4. Jagannath (Deceased) S/o Shri Mathura Lal, Through Legal Representative. 4/1. Smt. Gulab Bai (Wife), R/o Village Morana, Tehsil Deegod, District Kota(Raj.) 4/2. Shiv Prasad S/o Shri Jagannath, R/o Village Morana, Tehsil Deegod, District Kota (Raj) ----Respondents For Appellant(s) : Mr. Naveen Dhuwan For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vishwajeet Mantri HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU Order 27/10/2025 1. The appellant-Nand Bihari Gautam son of late Jagannath has preferred this appeal assailing the order passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby the learned Single Judge vide order dated 23.07.2025, set aside the judgments impugned before it passed by the Revenue Court and remanded the matter back to the [2025:RJ-JP:43053-DB] (2 of 2) [SAW-1001/2025] Revenue Court of Assistant Collector. The appellant remained unattended before the Court and ex parte proceedings had been initiated. However, learned counsel submits that since the matter has been remanded back to the Revenue Court of Assistant Collector relating to the other issues, the same can only be decided after issue No.2 relating to legal status is decided by the Civil Court. 2. We are of the firm view that such cannot be the approach to be adopted. The Revenue Court of Assistant Collector would decide the issues which it has jurisdiction to examine, however, the claim of the appellant/original plaintiff of being adopted son of Ganpath is an issue which can only be looked into or finding can be arrived at by the Civil Court after examining the evidence placed before it. 3. We do not find any reason, therefore, to interfere or differ from the order and judgment passed by the learned Single Judge dated 23.07.2025. 4. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. Pending application(s) shall also stand disposed of. (BALJINDER SINGH SANDHU),J (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),ACTING CJ Rahul/Diksha-83