ORDER :

Mahendar Kumar Goyal, J. - This revision petition, which is reported to be time barred by 177 days, is accompanied with an application under Section 5 of the LIMITATION ACT seeking condonation of delay.

2. For the reasons stated in the application (2248/2019), the same is allowed. Delay in preferring the revision petition is condoned.

3. This revision petition is directed against the order dated 24.01.2019 whereby, the learned District Judge, Bundi (for brevity "the learned trial Court") has dismissed an application filed by the petitioner/defendant No.2 (hereinafter referred to as "the petitioner") under Order 7, Rule 11 CPC.

4. The relevant facts in brief are that the respondents No.1 & 2/plaintiffs filed a suit for cancellation of sale deed, mandatory and permanent injunction against the petitioner and the respondents No.3 to 17 alleging therein that the subject sale deed came to be executed on the basis of a false and fabricated power of attorney. An application filed therein by the petitioner under Order 7, Rule 11 CPC has been dismissed by the learned trial Court vide order dated 24.01.2019.

5. Assailing the order, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned trial Court has failed to appreciate that in view of the relief claimed in the suit with regard to correction in the entries in the revenue record, it is triable by the revenue Court only. He, therefore, prays that the revision petition be allowed, the order dated 24.01.2019 be quashed and set aside and the application filed by him under Order 7, Rule 11 CPC be allowed.

6. Heard. Considered.

7. It is trite law that when cancellation of a deed is sought alleging its execution by fraud, it is the Civil Court only which has jurisdiction to try the suit even if the land is agricultural in nature. A Coordinate Bench of this Court has, in case of Sunil Bhandari & Ors. v. Shakuntala Kumari & Ors.: 2018 (3) RLW 2396 (Raj.), held as under:-

"Once the allegations made in the plaint seeks to make out a case of a fraudulent/forged power of attorney, which formed the basis for execution of sale deed, the said transaction would only be voidable and cannot be said to be void and therefore, the suit for seeking cancellation of such voidable documents would only be maintainable before a civil Court."

8. Indisputably, in the present case, cancellation of the sale deed has been sought by the plaintiffs executed allegedly on the basis of a forged and fabricated power of attorney. The correction in the entries in the revenue record being consequential relief, the learned trial Court did not err in dismissing the application filed by the petitioner under Order 7, Rule 11 CPC.

9. Resultantly, this revision petition is dismissed being devoid of merit.