Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL, J
MANISH KUMAR S/O MAHESH KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
LATE MAHESH KUMAR S/O LATE AMARCHAND JAIN – Respondent
Judgment :
1. This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 31.07.2024 passed by the Board of Revenue, Rajasthan, Ajmer (for brevity “the BoR”) in Revision No.TA/4291/2024: Kamla Devi & Ors. versus Abhishek Kumar & Ors. whereby, while allowing the revision petition ex parte, order of the Sub-Divisional Officer, Dantaramgarh dated 08.11.2010 was set aside with a direction to it to decide the application pending consideration under Section 212 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act of 1955”) within a month.
2. The relevant facts in brief are that Shri Mahesh Kumar-the predecessor-in-interest of the respondents No.1/1 to 1/5/Plaintiff (for short “the plaintiff”) filed a suit against the petitioner/defendant No.1 and the proforma respondents No.2 to 8 for declaration, permanent injunction and correction of entries in Court of Sub-Divisional Officer, Dantaramgarh, District Sikar (for brevity “the trial Court”) wherein, in an application filed under Section 212 of the Act of 1955, the trial Court, vide its ex parte ad-interim injunction order dated 08.11.2010, directed the parties to maintain status qu
The Board of Revenue must issue notice to all parties before allowing revision petitions to uphold the principles of natural justice.
The High Court will not interfere with an order passed by a lower court or tribunal under Article 227 of the Constitution of India if quashing the order would result in restoring an illegal order.
A fair hearing is essential in legal proceedings; lack of opportunity renders judgments void and necessitates reconsideration.
Revision petitions under Section 230 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act are not maintainable against interim orders, which are not final adjudications, reinforcing the distinction between revisional and ap....
Revision – Law mandates maintainability of revision petition only in a “decided” case by subordinate revenue court where no appeal lies and secondly, on the ground of jurisdictional error committed b....
Revision petitions against ad-interim orders are not maintainable under Section 230 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, as such orders are not 'decided cases'.
The court's decision was based on the principle that the nature of the order being interlocutory, and the judgments not suffering from any factual or legal error apparent from the face of the record,....
Revisions under the Rajasthan Tenancy Act are maintainable only against final decisions; interim orders do not constitute 'decided cases'.
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
