Suits concerning unconverted agricultural land are exclusively under the jurisdiction of revenue courts, as established by Section 207 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955.

ORDER :

KULDEEP MATHUR, J.

1. The instant revision petition has been filed by the petitioners- defendants aggrieved against the order dated 06.09.2025 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Rawatsar, District Hanumangarh in Civil Original Case No.93/2025 titled as “Kashiram Vs. Aman Tikka & Ors.” whereby the application preferred by the petitioners under Order VII Rule 11 CPC has been rejected. The respondent No.1 - plaintiff filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction praying that land of plot No. 51 measuring 30’ x 60’ (1800 sq. ft.) situated at in Chak No.11 AM Patthar No.166/410 (37) Kila No.23, has been in the ownership of the plaintiff and further prayed for grant of permanent injunction.

2. In the civil suit, it was stated that the petitioners were having the agricultural land in Chak No.11 AM Patthar No.166/410 (37), total 0.2400 hectare i.e. 08 Bigha 19 Biswa. In the year 2006, the petitioners- defendants submitted a proposal for developing a residential colony over the aforesaid piece of land. Thereafter, by telling the respondent- plaintiff that the permission for developing a residential colony has been obtained by them, sold the plots to him and various persons. In the plaint, it was also averred that attempts being made by the petitioners- defendants to forcibly dispossess the respondent- plaintiff from the premises in question. On these grounds, injunction was sought against the petitioners- defendants.

3. The petitioners-defendants filed an application under Order VII and Rule 11 CPC inter alia with the averments that the suit was barred under Section 207 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955. The respondent- plaintiff filed reply to the application on the stating that the land in question is not an agricultural land and the same was being used for residential purposes. Further, the office of Town Planner, Bikaner vide communication dated 29.09.2006 addressed to Executive Officer, Nagar Palika, Rawatsar has granted permission for development of residential colony in relation to the land in question.

4. The learned trial Court after hearing the parties, vide order dated 06.09.2025 rejected application filed by the petitioners- defendants under Order 41 Rule 11 CPC negating the plea with regard to land in question being agricultural land and, therefore, the suit being barred under Section 207 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners- defendants submitted that a bare perusal of the para No.2 and 3 of the plaint clearly indicates that the land in question is an agricultural land and has not been converted so far. No document establishing that the land in question has been converted for non-agricultural purposes by the concerned Government officials is placed on record. Mere filing an application seeking conversion of land for non-agricultural purposes ipso facto would not mean that the permission for converting the land for non-agricultural purposes has been granted.

6. On these grounds, learned counsel contended that the suit is barred under Section 207 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 and consequently, the same was liable to be rejected. Reliance was placed on judgment in S.B. Civil Revision Petition No.54/2015 “Karan Singh & Ors. vs. Manu Bal Shikshan Sansthan & Ors.” decided on 09.05.2018.

7. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1- plaintiff submitted that in the plaint, specific averment has been made that vide communications dated 29.09.2006, the land has been permitted to be used for residential purposes. He submitted that the nature of land had already changed from agricultural to non-agricultural (residential) and, therefore, learne