Back
VINIT KUMAR MATHUR
Asharam – Appellant
Versus
Revenue Board Of Rajasthan – Respondent
ORDER
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The present writ petition has been filed against the order dated 17.07.2019 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Ratangarh, whereby the application preferred by the petitioner under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC was rejected. Against the order dated 17.07.2019, the petitioner preferred revision as well as review before the Board of Revenue, Rajasthan, Ajmer which were also rejected vide orders dated 01.08.2019 and 27.11.2019 respectively.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent Balu Ram preferred a suit for declaration, permanent injunction and correction of revenue entries. During the pendency of the suit, the petitioner who is respondent in the suit preferred an application under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC for dismissal of the suit on the ground that notices under Sections 80 and 80(2) CPC were not served upon the respondents. Learned counsel further submits that the service of such notice was a condition precedent for the maintainability of the suit and since the same was not served, the suit proceedings should have been dismissed. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the non-service of notice under Sectio
The sufficiency of grounds for dismissal under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC and the requirement of serving notice under Section 80 CPC for multiple reliefs sought in a suit.
A party has the right to seek corrections in revenue records, and questions of fact are to be determined by trial courts, not through writ intervention.
The proceedings under Section 136 of the Act of 1956 are summary in nature and cannot be treated as a suit, thus the application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC is not maintainable.
An application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC must be disposed of before trial; failure constitutes a jurisdictional error warranting revision.
The affidavit discrepancies regarding property dues do not invalidate a plaint's cause of action under Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC, which remains subject to resolution by the trial court.
Plaint cannot be rejected when it discloses cause of action.
The Civil Court is the proper forum for seeking a declaration of title over immovable property, and the mandatory notice under Section 80 CPC can be dispensed with if justified.
Sections 151 and 152 CPC are limited to clerical corrections and do not allow for substantive reviews of prior judgments.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
