##PAGE1##

[2026:RJ-JP:12504]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8939/2025

1. Navneet, S/o Ramkishore

2. Sneh, D/o Ramkishore

3. Bhuvnesh, D/o Ramkishore

4. Karuna, D/o Ramkishore

5. Annu D/o Ramkishore, All Are Residents Of Village Patanpole, Tehsil Ladpura, District Kota.

----Petitioners Versus

1. Amrish, S/o Shri Nandkishore 2. Rajesh, S/o Shri Nandkishore

3. Madhu Bai D/o Shri Nandkishore, Residents Of Village Bhimganj Mandi Station, Kota.

4. Surendra, S/o Bhairu Lal 5. Narendra, S/o Bhairu Lal

6. Malti, D/o Bhairu Lal

7. Santosh, D/o Bhairu Lal

8. Asha D/o Bhairu Lal, Residents Of Village Patanpole, Tehsil Ladpura, District Kota.

9. Beena Bai D/o Nandkishore S/o Mukesh Gautam, R/o Bundi, District Bundi.

10. State Of Rajasthan, Through Tehsildar, Khanpur, District Jhalawar.

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Y.K. Sharma.

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI

Order

25/03/2026

1. The present writ petition has been filed with the following

prayers:-

(Uploaded on 25/03/2026 at 09:40:10 PM)

(Downloaded on 02/04/2026 at 12:20:30 AM)

[2026:RJ-JP:12504] (2 of 4) [CW-8939/2025]

"It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court would graciously be pleased to call for the entire record of the court below pertaining to the case of petitioners, examine the same and accept/allow this writ

petition and further be pleased to;

(i) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 05.04.2024 passed by Board of Rajasthan, Ajmer in Appeal No. 2024/1316 titled Amrish & ors. vs. Navneet & ors. and further be pleased to dismiss the application of the

respondent No. 1 to 3/plaintiffs for temporary injunction.

(ii) Any other order or direction which the Hon'ble Court deems just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be passed in favour of the

petitioners."

2. The present writ petition arises out of a dispute relating to ancestral agricultural land bearing Khasra Nos. 216, 311, 879, 882 and 956 admeasuring 45 Bigha 19 Biswa, which is recorded in the joint names of the petitioners and the respondents as co-tenants. Respondent Nos. 1 to 3, along with other plaintiffs, initially filed a suit on 28.07.2016 before the SDO, Khanpur, District Jhalawar seeking declaration, permanent injunction and deletion of the names of the petitioners and other co-defendants from the revenue record, along with an application for temporary injunction under Section 212 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955. The said application for temporary injunction was dismissed by the trial court on 03.01.2017, and thereafter the plaintiffs withdrew the suit on 19.04.2017 without seeking liberty to file a fresh suit on the same cause of action. Subsequently, the plaintiffs filed a second suit on the same cause of action before the same court. In the said proceedings, the petitioners and other co-defendants filed a counterclaim asserting their 1/4th share each in the ancestral property and seeking partition. The trial court, however, vide order dated 30.08.2017, granted temporary injunction in favour of the plaintiffs directing status quo. The said order was challenged by

(Uploaded on 25/03/2026 at 09:40:10 PM)

(Downloaded on 02/04/2026 at 12:20:30 AM)

[2026:RJ-JP:12504] (3 of 4) [CW-8939/2025] the petitioners before the Revenue Appellate Authority, Kota, which allowed the appeal on 12.07.2018 and set aside the order of temporary injunction. The revision petition filed by the plaintiffs before the Board of Revenue was later dismissed as infructuous on 01.09.2022 after dismissal of the main suit. During the course of proceedings, the petitioners filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 read with Order 23 Rule 1(4) CPC, contending that the second suit was barred as it was filed on the same cause of action without liberty after withdrawal of the earlier suit. The SDO accepted the said contention and dismissed the suit vide order dated 04.08.2022. The appeal preferred by the