MOHAN LAL, SON OF SHRI GUMANARAM v. SUDHKANWAR AS KNOWN AS DAUGHTER OF SHRI CHANDRA SINGH ALIAS CHAND SINGH
CW/12670/2025 · 2026-03-25
Nupur Bhati
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 5944 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 5944 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2026:RJ-JP:12592] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12670/2025
1. Mohan Lal, Son Of Shri Gumanaram, Aged About 60 Years, Resident Of Village Shyampura, Tehsil Dhod, District Sikar (Rajasthan)
2. Triloka Ram, Son Of Shri Gumanaram, Aged About 51 Years, Resident Of Village Shyampura, Tehsil Dhod, District Sikar (Rajasthan)
3. Tiju Devi, Wife Of Late Shri Mangi Lal, Aged About 70 Years, Resident Of Village Shyampura, Tehsil Dhod, District Sikar (Rajasthan)
4. Mahendra, Son Of Late Shri Mangi Lal, Aged About 41 Years, Resident Of Village Shyampura, Tehsil Dhod, District Sikar (Rajasthan)
5. Tara Chand, Son Of Late Shri Mangi Lal, Aged About 45 Years, Resident Of Village Shyampura, Tehsil Dhod, District Sikar (Rajasthan)
6. Bhanwari Devi, Daughter Of Late Shri Mangi Lal, Aged About 48 Years, Resident Of Village Shyampura, Tehsil Dhod, District Sikar (Rajasthan)
7. Mahaveer, Son Of Shri Kesar, Aged About 32 Years, Resident Of Village Shyampura, Tehsil Dhod, District Sikar (Rajasthan)
8. Bhanwar Lal, Son Of Shri Muknaram, Aged About 38 Years, Resident Of Village Shyampura, Tehsil Dhod, District Sikar (Rajasthan)
9. Mahesh, Son Of Shri Muknaram, Aged About 36 Years, Resident Of Village Shyampura, Tehsil Dhod, District Sikar (Rajasthan)
10. Ladu Devi, Wife Of Shri Muknaram, Aged About 73 Years, Resident Of Village Shyampura, Tehsil Dhod, District Sikar (Rajasthan) ----Petitioners Versus
1. Sudhkanwar As Known As Daughter Of Shri Chandra Singh Alias Chand Singh, Resident Of Village Pura Badi, Tehsil Dhod, District Sikar
2. Amri Kanwar, Wife Of Shri Nand Singh, Resident Of Village Shyampura, Tehsil Dhod, District Sikar
3. Supyar Kanwar, Daughter Of Shri Nand Singh, Resident Of Village Shyampura, Tehsil Dhod, District Sikar
4. Babu Lal, Son Of Shri Mukandaram, Resident Of Village Shyampura, Tehsil Dhod, District Sikar
5. Sub Registrar, Dhod, District Sikar
6. Govt Of Rajasthan Through Tehsildar, Dhod, District Sikar ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashwani Kumar Chobisa. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Ram Kishan Sharma.
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI
[2026:RJ-JP:12592] (2 of 2) [CW-12670/2025]
Order 25/03/2026
1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners with the following prayers:
“(a) by issuance of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction the judgment dated 21.03.2024 (Annx-8) passed by the Board of Revenue, Ajmer in Appeal/TA/1784/2022/Sikar titled Mohan Lal & Ors V/s Sudhkanwar & Ors as well as the judgement dated (Annx-7) passed by 25.03.2022 the Revenue Appellate Authority, Sikar in Appeal No 59/2018 titled Sudhkanwar V/s Mangi Lal & Ors be set aside and ; (b) by issuance of a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction the judgment dated 12.12.2015 (Annx-6) passed by the Assistant Collector (Second), Sikar be restored and; (c) by issuance of appropriate writ, order or direction if any pre- judicial order is passed during the pendency of the writ petition then same may also be set aside and ; (d) Any other writ order or direction which may be deemed proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be issued in favour of petitioners.”
2.
Learned counsel for the respondent No.1 submits that an application has been filed for bringing on record the relevant documents in order to submit that the writ petition has become infructuous. He submits that the petitioners have complied with the orders passed passed by the Revenue Courts and the proceedings are under process. He submits that as the petitioners have complied with the orders passed by the Board of Revenue as well as the Revenue Appellate Authority, the challenge to the order dated 21.03.2024 (Annex.8), is of no consequence.
3.
Learned counsel for the petitioners is unable to refute the
submissions made by learned counsel for the respondents.
4. In view thereof, the application (I.A. No.1/2025) is allowed. The documents filed along with the application are taken on record.
5. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as having become infructous.
(DR.NUPUR BHATI),J S.Sharma- 61 /