SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(Raj) 1468

DINESH MEHTA
Puran Singh Rawat – Appellant
Versus
General Public – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Sandeep Saruparia

JUDGMENT :

DINESH MEHTA, J.

Feeling aggrieved of the order dated 12.04.2013, passed by the learned District Judge, Rajsamand (hereinafter referred to as the ‘trial court’), vide which the petitioners’ suit had been returned under Order VII Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the petitioner has invoked the power of superintendence of this Court, vested in it, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

2. The facts are handful, but all of them need to be noticed.

3. The petitioners filed a suit for declaration of their inheritance rights with the following prayer

^^vr% fuosnu gS fd oknhx.k dk oknk Lohdkj fd;k tkdj oknhx.k ds i{k esa oknhx.k ds i{k esa oknhx.k dks e`rd xksek] [kqek] /kkiw] ykyk] os.kk ds ,dek= mRrjkf/kdkjh okfjl gksus dh ?kks’k.kkRed fMØh Ápfyr QjekbZ tkos A

vU; dksbZ lgk;rk tks oknhx.k dks fnyk;k tkuk U;k;ksfpr gks fnykbZ tkos A**


4. Before the suit could be registered, the trial court vide its order dated 12.04.2013, returned the plaint, to be filed in revenue court, with the following observations

^^fof/k dk ;g lqLFkfir fl/nkar gS fd fdlh okn ds {ks=kf/kdkj dk fcanq okn ds vfHkopu ds vk/kkj ij gh r; fd;k tkuk pkfg, A gLrxr okn esa oknhx.k us okn ds VkbZVy






















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top