[2025:RJ-JP:46666]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 43/2025 Maganbai Wife Of Vishram, Aged About 54 Years, Resident Of 20 Jai Jawan Colony-3, J.l.n. Marg, Jaipur, District Jaipur-Rajasthan.

----Petitioner Versus

1. Chanchalrani Daughter Of Tilak Wife Of Bihari Lal, Aged About 80 Years, Resident Of Dausa, Presently Residing At House No. 410, Ward No. 4, Mehrauli, South Delhi(Since Deceased).

1/1 Love Anand Son Of Shyamsunder Anand; 1/2 Khus Anand Son Of Shyamsunder Anand, Both Resident of: House No. 410, Ward No. 4, Mehrauli, South Delhi.

1/3 Shivani Anand Wife Of Rahul Arod, Resident Of WZ 1224 A, Rani Bagh, New Delhi.

1/4 Nisha Anand Wife Of Mohit Pal Singh, Resident Of G-41/1, Phase 1, Budh Vihar, New Delhi.

----Respondent/Plaintiff

2. Satpal Son Of Tilak, Aged About 72 Years, Presently Residing At 16/3, Shree Apartment, Mehrauli, Gadarpur, South Delhi.

3. Ashok Son Of Tilak, Aged About 71 Years, Resident Of

263/2, Shree Apartment, Mehrauli, South Delhi.

4. State Of Rajasthan, Through Tehsildar, Dausa.

5. Sub-Registrar, Dausa, District Dausa.

----Respondent(s)/Defendant(s)

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shreyansh Sharma, Adv.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Yogesh Pujari, Adv.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UMA SHANKER VYAS

Judgment / Order

19/11/2025 ;kph@izfroknh la[;k 1 eaxyckbZ ¼ftls vkxs izfroknh l[a ;k 1 dgk tk,xk½ dh vksj ls ;g fuxjkuh ;kfpdk varxZr 115 lh ih lh fo}ku ftyk U;k;k/kh'k] nkSlk }kjk nhokuh okn la[;k 25@2023 esa ikfjr vk{ksfir vkns'k fnukad 07-01-2025 ls O;fFkr gksdj izLrqr dh] ftlds ek/;e ls izfroknh la[;k&1 }kjk izLrqr vkosnu varxZr vkns'k 7 fu;e 11 lhihlh [kkfjt fd;k x;kA fo}ku vf/koDrk ;kph@izfroknh la[;k&1 o v;kph@okfn;k dh cgl lquh x;h ,oa vfHkys[k dk voyksdu fd;k x;kA lqlxa r rF; ;g gS fd izR;FkhZ la[;k&1@okfn;k papyjkuh dh vksj ls fopkj.k U;k;ky; ds le{k okn izLrqr dj vfHkdfFkr fd;k fd oknxzLr d`f"k Hkwfe mlds firk fryd iatkch dh Fkh] fryd iatkch ds okfn;k lfgr rhu iq=h o nks iq= gksdj izR;sd dk 1@5 fgLlk Fkk] ysfdu fryd iatkch dh e`R;q ds mijkar muds nks iq= izfroknh l[a ;k 2 o 3 us ;g Hkwfe vdsys vius uke ukekUrfjr djok yh vkSj dkykUrj esa fnukad 18-01-2023 dks izfroknh la[;k 1 dks fodz; dj nh tcfd bl Hkwfe esa okfn;k dk 1@5 fgLlk Fkk] vr% ,slh fLFkfr esa mlds fgLls dh lhek rd fookfnr fodz; i= fnukad 18-01-2023 dks 'kUw ; ?kksf"kr fd;k tkos rFkk nLrkost dks fujLr fd;s tkus dk uksV iath;u dk;kZy; esa yxk;s tkus dk vkns'k fn;k tkosA jktLFkku dk'rdkjh vf/kfu;e] 1955 ¼ftls vkxs **vf/kfu;e] 1955 dgk tk,xk½ dh /kkjk 207 ds vuqlkj ekeyk jktLo U;k;ky; ds {ks=kf/kdkj dk gksuk crkrs gq, okn vkns'k 7 fu;e 11 lhihlh ds rgr [kkfjt fd;s tkus dk fuosnu fd;kA ;g vkosnu fopkj.k U;k;ky; }kjk vLohdkj fd;k x;k ftlls O;fFkr gksdj ;g fuxjkuh ;kfpdk izLrqr dh x;h gSA fo}ku vf/koDrk izR;FkhZ@okfn;k dk fuosnu gS fd oLrqr% ;g okn fodz; i= fnukad 18-01-2023 dks 'kUw ; ?kksf"kr fd;s tkus ds lca a/k esa gS vkSj bl izdkj dk vuqrks"k iznku fd;s tkus grs q ek= flfoy U;k;ky; gh l{ke gSA ekeyk flfoy U;k;ky; }kjk gh laKs; gS rFkk vra esa vk{ksfir vkns'k dks rF;ksa o fof/k ds foijhr gksuk crkrs gq, fuxjkuh ;kfpdk [kkfjt fd;s tkus dk fuosnu fd;kA izfroknh dh vksj ls izLrqr U;kf;d fu.kZ; I;kjsyky cuke 'kqHksUnz fiykfu;k oxSjg ¼2019½ 3 692 vius rdksZa ds leFkZu esa izLrqr fd;k SCC gS ftlesa ekuuh; loksZPp U;k;ky; }kjk ;g O;oLFkk izfrikfnr dh x;h gS fd ;fn okn ds [kkrsnkjh vf/kdkj pqukSrhxzLr o fookfnr gS rks ,slh fLFkfr esa vf/kfu;e] 1955 dh /kkjk 88 ds rgr ?kks"k.kk dk okn yk;k tkuk visf{kr gksxk rFkk ,sls izdj.k dh lquokbZ dk {ks=kf/kdkj ek= jktLo U;k;ky; dks gS] /kkjk 207 o 256 vf/kfu;e] 1955 ds izko/kkuksa ds vuqlkj ,sls ekeyksa esa flfoy U;k;ky;ksa dk {ks=kf/kdkj oftZr gksuk fu.khZr fd;k gSA mijksDr fu.kZ; ds iSjk la[;k 16] 17] 27 o 28 lqlxa r gS] tks fuEukuqlkj gS%&

"16. Section 207 read with Section 256 of the Tenancy Act bars the jurisdiction of the civil courts in respect of suits and applications of the nature specified in the Third Schedule to the Act. The question before us is whether the relief claimed by the