##PAGE1##

[2026:RJ-JD:6201]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JODHPUR

S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 244/2025

1. Lakhotia Somani Charitable Trust Shri Dungargarh,

Through Manager Trustee Jagdish Prasad S/o Yamuna

Prasad Aged About 60 Years R/o Adasar Bas Ward No 21

Shri Dungargarh District Bikaner

2. Jagdish Prasad S/o Yamuna Prasad, Aged About 60 Years,

R/o Adasar Bas Ward No 21 Shri Dungargarh District

Bikaner

----Petitioners

Versus

1. Murti Shri Hanuman Ji Mandir, Hanuman Mandir Adasar

Bas Shri Dungargarh District Bikaner Through Next Friend

Radheyshyam Swami S/o Late Jamuna Das Swami

Authorised Pujari Murti Shri Hanuman Ji Mandir R/o

Adasar Bas Ward No 20 Shri Dungargarh District Bikaner

2. Omprakash Sharma S/o Malchand, Adasar Bas Ward No

20 Shri Dungargarh District Bikaner

3. Jagdish Prasad Kundal S/o Late Jugal Kishore, Adasar Bas

Ward No 20 Shri Dungargarh District Bikaner

4. Pawan Kumar S/o Omprakash Darji, Adasar Bas Ward No

20 Shri Dungargarh District Bikaner

5. Radheshyam Swami S/o Late Jamuna Das Swami,

Authorised Pujari Murti Shri Hanuman Ji Mandir R/o

Adasar Bas Ward No 20 Shri Dungargarh District Bikaner

6. Nandkishor Lakhotia S/o Late Gulab Chand Lakhotia,

Adasar Bas Ward No 21 Shri Dungargarh District Bikaner

7. Assistant Commissioner, Devasthan Department Ratna

Bihari Park Bikaner

8. State Of Rajasthan, Through District Collector Bikaner

9. Kailash Chandra Kalani S/o Late Dhanraj, Adasar Bas Shri

Dungargarh District Bikaner

10. Rudrika D/o Kailash Chandra, Through Natural Guardian

Kailash Gardian S/o Late Dhanraj R/o Adasar Bas Shri

Dungargarh District Bikaner

11. Risabh S/o Kailash Chandra, Adasar Bas Shri Dungargarh

District Bikaner

(Uploaded on 15/02/2026 at 01:08:32 PM)

(Downloaded on 17/02/2026 at 03:06:11 AM)

[2026:RJ-JD:6201] (2 of 3) [CR-244/2025]

12. Vishal S/o Narayan Chand Joshi, Adasar Bas Shri

Dungargarh District Bikaner

13. Piyush S/o Subhash Chandra Joshi, Adasar Bas Shri

Dungargarh District Bikaner

14. Sarita Devi W/o Late Mukesh Kalani, Adasar Bas Shri

Dungargarh District Bikaner

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Chotia

For Respondent(s) : Mr. Prashant Tatia

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

Order

03/02/2026

1. The present revision petition has been filed aggrieved of

order dated 07.08.2025 passed by the Additional District Judge,

Sri Dungargarh, District Bikaner (hereinafter referred to as ‘the

Trial Court’) in Civil Original Suit No.41/2009 whereby the

application under Order VII Rule 11, CPC as filed on behalf of the

defendants, stood rejected.

2. The application under Order VII Rule 11, CPC was filed by

the defendants with an averment that the plaintiffs had pleaded

the defendant-trust to be a public trust. In that view, the suit

before a Civil Court was barred in terms of Section 73 of the

Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the

Act of 1959’). It was further pleaded that the relief in terms of

Section 38 of the Act of 1959 was prayed for by the plaintiffs in

the suit and therefore too, the suit was barred by law.

3. The learned Trial Court while rejecting the application

specifically observed that Issue No.4 pertaining to the nature of

(Uploaded on 15/02/2026 at 01:08:32 PM)

(Downloaded on 17/02/2026 at 03:06:11 AM)

[2026:RJ-JD:6201] (3 of 3) [CR-244/2025]

defendant-trust had already been framed in the suit and hence,

unless and until the said issue was decided on basis of the

evidence as led by the parties, it could not be concluded that the

defendant-trust was a public or a private trust.

4. After hearing the counsels and perusing the order impugned,

this Court is of the clear opinion that the observation as made and

the findings as recorded by the learned Trial Court are totally in

consonance with law. Issue No.4 having been framed qua the

nature of the defendant-trust is not disputed. Once an issue had

been framed, without decision on the said issue, the Court

definitely could not have reached to a conclusion that the

defendant-trust was a public trust. Unless and until that

conclusion was