HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
GANESH RAM MEENA, J.
Dinesh Bhargava, S/o Late Shri Laxmi Narain Bhargava - Appellant
Versus
Mandir Murti Shri Charan Das Ji Maharaj – Respondent
S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 201 of 2018, S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 200 of 2018, S.B. Civil First Appeal No. 355 of 2018
Decided On : 08-10-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. common judgment for multiple appeals. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. details of factual background pertaining to land disputes. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. arguments regarding jurisdiction and standing of parties. (Para 8 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. discussion on civil and revenue court jurisdiction. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 19) |
| 5. conditions under which evidence can be admitted. (Para 15 , 16) |
| 6. details of property laws regarding gift deeds. (Para 22 , 24) |
| 7. analysis of legal provisions regarding civil suits. (Para 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 8. court's jurisdiction dependent on revenue court findings. (Para 28 , 30 , 31) |
| 9. res judicata and observations on past cases. (Para 32 , 33) |
| 10. reaffirmation of property transfer rules. (Para 34 , 39 , 40) |
| 11. final views on jurisdiction and case dismissal. (Para 41 , 42) |
| 12. court's conclusion and orders for appeals. (Para 46 , 48 , 49) |
JUDGMENT :
GANESH RAM MEENA, J.
1. All these four appeals arise out of common judgment and decree and the controversy involved in all these appeals are also similar, hence, these four appeals are being decided by a common judgment.
2. These four appeals have been filed by the appellants for quashing and setting aside the judgment and decree dated 12.01.2018 passed by the Court of learned Addl. District Judge No.3, Alwar (for short ‘the court below’) in Civil Suit No. 41/2011 (49/2008) and in Civil Suit No.42/2011 (48/2008)-in First Appeal No.359/2018.
3. Facts of First Appeals No.201/2018, 200/2018 & 355/2018:-
The facts emerge out from the pleadings are that on 17.11.2008 the plaintiff - respondents No. 1 to 4 filed a suit against the defendants appellants and defendant - respondent No. 1 and 3 for declaration and permanent injunction stating therein apart from other facts that the plaintiff respondent Mandir Murti Shri Charan Das Ji Maharaj is situated in Kasba Dahra, earlier which was known as Mandir Bihari Ji, but due to tapsaya by Sant Charan Das Ji Maharaj between 1859 to 1871 in the temple it is being called as Mandir Murti Shri Charan Das Ji Maharaj, Dahra. Erstwhile Alwar His Highness Sawai Bakhtawar Singh granted agricultural land as Mafi to the aforesaid temple between 1859 to 1871, ad-measuring about 26 Bigha 8 Biswa and about 50 Bigha in total about 76 Bigha in Gram Dahra and Gram Bahaurpur, which was recorded in the name of Sadhu Shri Charan Das Ji Maharaj and expenses of seva puja in temple, etc are being borne out of the income from aforesaid land. After demise of Shri Charan Das Ji Maharaj aforesaid land was recorded in the name of his Chela Shri Puran Das Ji Maharaj and after demise of Shri Puran Das Ji Maharaj aforesaid land was recorded in the name of his Chela Shri Gopal Das Ji Maharaj being Mahant of Mandir Charan Das. A suit was filed by another Mahant Seva Das Chela Prem Das against Gopal Das Chela Puran Das before the Court of S.D.O., in which compromise was filed by both the parties in collusion and they got decree in aforesaid suit on 04.04.2007. On the basis of aforesaid decree entries were also changed and they got recorded the aforesaid in their respective names on the basis of aforesaid collusive decree. Thereafter, the defendant respondent No. 5 has illegally executed three gift deeds, described in Para No. 1 of the plaint, in favour of the defendant No. 2- appellant which were registered on 24.09.2007 in the office of Sub - Registrar which are liable to be declared as void. After execution and registration of aforesaid three gift deeds in favour of the defendant No. 2- appellant mutation entries No. 267, 268 and 269 dated 20.02.2008 were made in his favour, which were challenged by the plaintiff respondents by filing appeals before the Collector, Alwar. The defendant No. 2- appellant has sold 92 air land bearing khasara No. 515 through sale deed dated 23.07.2008 in consideration of Rs. 4,75,000/- in favour of defendant No. 3 which is also liable to be declared void against the rights of the plaintiff - respondent No. 1. Aforesaid land is in the possession of the plaintiff








Chief Engineer, Hydel Project & Ors. v. Ravinder Nath & Ors.
Chitturi Subbanna v. Kudapa Subbanna & Ors.
Anathula Sudhakar v. P. Buchi Reddy (Dead) by LRs & Ors.
Prahlad Pradhan & Ors. v. Sonu Kumhar & Ors.
Eureka Builders & Ors. v. Gulabchand & Ors.
Vasantha (Dead) through LR. V. Rajalakshmi @ Rajam (Dead) Thr. LRs
Dr. Jagmittar Sain Bhagat v. Dir. Health Services, Haryana & Ors.
Civil Courts lack jurisdiction in agricultural land disputes unless khatedari rights are declared by Revenue Courts; indisputable recorded ownership is essential for claims.
Jurisdiction to declare khatedari rights is exclusively with Revenue Courts; Civil Courts can only grant consequential reliefs after such determination.
The civil court has jurisdiction to hear a suit for cancellation of a sale deed relating to converted land, even if the sale deed was executed before the conversion.
Point of law: Considerations in terms of Section 100 CPC arise only when there is substantial question of law and not mere such questions of law or one based on facts. The learned counsel for the res....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.