SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Raj) 8020

HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JAIPUR BENCH)
NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA
SMT. JYOTI GUPTA S/O SANJAY KUMAR RAJORIA – Appellant
Versus
BASANITI LAL S/O KANARAM – Respondent
CR / 12 / 2021



[2025:RJ-JP:17633]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 12/2021

1. Smt. Jyoti Gupta W/o Sanjay Kumar Rajoria, R/o Bhagwatgarh, Tehsil Chouth Ka Barwada, District Sawaimadhopur, Through General Power Of Attorney Sanjay Kumar S/o Radheyshyam, R/o Bhagawatgarh, Tehsil Chouth Ka Barwada, District Sawaimadhopur.

2. Swapna W/o Naresh, R/o Bhagwatgarh, Tehsil Chouth Ka Barwada, District Sawaimadhopur, Through General Power Of Attorney Sanjay Kumar S/o Radheyshyam, R/o Bhagawatgarh, Tehsil Chouth Ka Barwada, District Sawaimadhopur ---Defendant Nos.5 and 6-Petitioners Versus

1. Basanti Lal S/o Kanaram, R/o Bhagawatgarh, Tehsil Chouth Ka Barwada, District Sawaimadhopur.

2. Kamruddin S/o Habeer (Deceased) Through Legal Representative, R/o Near Chainpura Railway Phatak, Niwai, District Tonk.

2/1. Min Shahidan, aged about 80 years, W/o Kamruddin, R/o Near Chainpura Railway Phatak, Niwai, District Tonk.

2/2. Rafiq S/o Kamruddin, aged about 50 years, R/o Near Chainpura Railway Phatak, Niwai, District Tonk.

2/3. Hameed S/o Kamruddin, aged about 55 years, R/o Near Chainpura Railway Phatak, Niwai, District Tonk.

3. Fakruddin S/o Habib, aged about 60 years, R/o Near Chainpura Railway Phatak, Niwai, District Tonk.

4. Chhotuddin S/o Habib, Aged About 55 Years, R/o Near Chainpura Railway Phatak, Niwai, District Tonk.

5. Satyanarayan S/o Ramlal, Aged About 64 Years, (Deceased) Through Legal Representatives-R/o Bhagawatgarh, Tehsil Chouth Ka Barwada, District Sawaimahopur.

5/1. Hanuman Prasad S/o Satyanarayan, R/o Bhagawatgarh, Tehsil Chouth Ka Barwada, District Sawaimahopur.

5/2. Amit S/o Satyanarayan, R/o Bhagawatgarh, Tehsil Chouth Ka Barwada, District Sawaimahopur.

5/3. Shilpi D/o Satyanarayan W/o Ashokji, R/o Bhagawatgarh, Tehsil Chouth Ka Barwada, District Sawaimahopur.

5/4. Rinki D/o Satyanarayan W/o Ashok Ji, R/o Bhagawatgarh, Tehsil Chouth Ka Barwada, District Sawaimahopur.

6. Tehsildar, Chouth Ka Barwada, District Sawaimadhopur ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Tarun Jain, Adv.

Mr. V. K. Tamoliya, Adv.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Teeka Ram Meena, Adv.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA

Judgment

Date of Judgment 28 /04/2025 The present revision petition has been filed by the petitioners-defendant Nos. 5 and 6 (for short ‘the defendants’) under Section 115 CPC against the order dated 27.11.2020 passed by the Civil Judge, Sawai Madhopur (for short ‘the trial court’) in Civil Suit No.99/2020, whereby the trial court dismissed the application filed by the defendants under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC.

Learned counsel for the defendants submits that the respondent No.1-plaintiff (for short ‘the plaintiff’) filed a suit for specific performance and cancellation of the sale deed of 10 biswas land situated in Bhagwatgarh and permanent injunction against the defendants. Learned counsel for the defendants further submits that the defendants filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC for dismissal of the suit before the trial court, which has been dismissed by the trial court vide order dated

27.11.2020.

Learned counsel for the defendants further submits that the present case relates to the agricultural land. The disputed land was allotted in the name of Ramlal, who is father of the defendant No.5-Satyanarayan. As per the contention, Ramlal had not cultivated the said land for two years after allotment. So, the said land was registered from Gair-Khatedari to Khatedari in the name of Habib S/o Ahmed Shah. Learned counsel for the defendants further submits that only the defendant No.2-Kamruddin sold the said land to the plaintiff on 09.12.1999 in a sale consideration of Rs.2,400/-. So, the plaintiff filed the said suit for specific performance as well as cancellation of the sale deed regarding 10 biswas land.

Learned counsel for the defendants also submits that the disputed land is entered in the revenue record in the name of the defendants. Unless and until the said mutation is changed in favour of defendant No.2, the said

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top