##PAGE1##

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5229/2026

Sonu S/o Rameshchand Agrawal, Aged About 40 Years, R/o Jhilay Road, Near Pulia, Kasba Niwai, District Tonk Rajasthan

----Petitioner Versus

1. Ramnarayan S/o Heera, R/o Gram Jaikishanpura, Tehsil Piplu, District Tonk.

2. Surendra Kumar S/o Kailashchand, R/o Gram Jaikishanpura, Tehsil Piplu, District Tonk.

3. Rekha W/o Bhudev Shanker, R/o Gram Jaikishanpura, Tehsil Piplu, District Tonk.

4. Mukesh S/o Heera, R/o Gram Jaikishanpura, Tehsil Piplu, District Tonk.

5. Govindi D/o Bajranga, R/o Gram Jaikishanpura, Tehsil Piplu, District Tonk Presently R/o Dangarthal, Tehsil Niwai,

District Tonk.

6. Sub-Registrar, Piplu, District Tonk.

7. State Of Rajasthan, Through Tehsildar Piplu, District Tonk. 8. Chhoti W/o Heera, R/o Gram Jaikishanpura, Tehsil Piplu,

District Tonk (Name Deleted Since Deceased).

----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ramit Pareek with Mr. Basant Pareek and

Mr. Kartik Sharma For Respondent(s) : Mr. Mitesh Sharma HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUROOP SINGHI

Order

28/03/2026

1. The present writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 27.02.2026 passed by the learned Board of Revenue, Ajmer (BOR), vide which the appeal filed by the respondent No.1 has

(D.B. SAW/334/2026 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)

(D(Uowplnolaodaedde do no n3 00/40/30/52/022062 6a ta 0t 90:20:83:52:21 3P PMM))

(2 of 4) [CW-5229/2026]

been allowed, the judgment and decree dated 05.02.2025 passed by the Revenue Appellate Authority, Tonk has been set aside and the judgment and decree dated 28.09.2022 passed by the Sub-

Divisional Officer, Piplu, District Tonk, has been restored.

2. Mr. Ramit Pareek, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as the genesis of the suit filed by respondent No.1 & 8/plaintiffs, being Civil Suit No. 63/2019 (13/2017) seeking declaration, correction of entries and permanent injunction was the alleged adoption of Bajranga (by one Ramnath), who is father of respondent No.5 – Govindi, who has sold the property to petitioner – Sonu by way of registered sale deed, the said issue could not have been decided by the Revenue Court and it is the Civil Court alone which has the competence to adjudicate the said

aspect.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the issue of adoption relates back to proprietary right over the land in question being Khasra Nos. 251, 467, 468, 469, 470, 471, 472, 473, 474, 481, 482, 583, 584, 585, 586, 587, 603, 407, 605, 701, 706, 782, 837, 892, 984 and 1026, total 26 Khasras, admeasuring 43 Bigha 19 Biswa, situated in Village Jaikishanpura, Tehsil Piplu, District Tonk, and thus, in terms of Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act, 1969 read with Section 239 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955, the Revenue Court lacked the requisite jurisdiction to adjudicate

on the aforementioned issue.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the learned BOR while arriving at the findings has specifically dealt with and adjudicated the issue of adoption of Bajranga, which was

beyond its scope and ambit.

(D.B. SAW/334/2026 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)

(D(Uowplnolaodaedde do no n3 00/40/30/52/022062 6a ta 0t 90:20:83:52:21 3P PMM))

(3 of 4) [CW-5229/2026]

5. In support of his submissions, he has placed reliance upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Ramchandra Dagdu Sonavane (Dead) By Lrs. & Ors. Versus Vithu Hira Mahar (Dead) By Lrs. & Ors. reported in (2009) 10 SCC 273 and the judgment dated 07.10.2024 passed by the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 493/2020 titled as Laxman Singh Versus Sayar Singh &

Ors.

6. Per Contra, Mr. Mitesh Sharma, Advocate, appearing on caveat on behalf of respondent No.1 submits that the issue of adoption was not even required to be adjudicated, as respondent No.5 - Govindi who is daughter of Bajranga and a predecessor in title of