Back
REKHA BORANA
Shivdayal Singh S/o Shri Indersingh – Appellant
Versus
Bhagirath S/o Keshuram – Respondent
ORDER
The present revision petition has been filed by petitioner-defendant No.3 against order dated 08.02.2017 passed by Senior Civil Judge, Ratangarh (Churu) in Civil Original Suit No.04/2014 whereby an application under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure as preferred by him has been dismissed.
2. Before proceeding on with the facts of the present case, it is relevant to note that the present revision petition was earlier dismissed vide order dated 01.06.2017 but review petition against the said order having been allowed vide order dated 02.04.2019, the present revision petition was restored and the same was directed to be listed for consideration afresh.
3. The facts of the case are that a suit for declaration and permanent injunction was filed by Bhagirath, plaintiff No.1 for declaration that the defendants have no easementary right of way in the plaintiffs’ agricultural land. It was averred in the plaint that defendant No.3 was forcibly trying to create a public way across the agricultural land of the plaintiffs whereas he had no such easementary right of a way qua plaintiffs’ agricultural land.
4. An application under Order VII Rule 11, CPC was filed by petitione
Suit for assertion that any person does not have an easementary right and further, to restrain said person from asserting such right can be maintained before Civil Court.
Civil Courts lack jurisdiction over agricultural disputes already pending in Revenue Courts, affirming the exclusivity of jurisdiction in such matters.
Civil courts lack jurisdiction over agricultural land disputes when a revenue suit is pending, and merits cannot be evaluated at the application stage under Order VII Rule 11 CPC.
Civil Courts possess jurisdiction to adjudicate easementary rights despite revenue authority's orders, provided disputes are not in respect of Government land.
A civil suit can proceed despite a pending revenue suit if the relief sought is not barred by law, as per the interpretation of Order VII Rule 11 CPC and Section 207 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act.
The jurisdiction of Civil Courts is barred in matters concerning tenancy rights that are to be decided by the Mamlatdar under the Agricultural Tenancy Act, particularly when the relief sought is a ne....
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
