Badharna, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur (Raj.) v. Shri Girdhari Sharma Son Of Shri Kanhiyalal Sharma

Judgment

1. Shri Girdhari Sharma Son Of Shri Kanhiyalal Sharma, Grandson Of Late Shri Shyola Alias Shyonarayan, Resident Of Gram Badharna, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur (Raj.). ---Respondent

2. Jagdish Son Of Late Shri Nathuram, Resident Of Gram Badharna, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur (Raj.).

3. Kailash Son Of Late Shri Nathuram, Resident Of Gram Badharna, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur (Raj.).

Shri Ravi Kumar Son Of Late Shri Nathuram, Resident Of Gram Badharna, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur (Raj.).

5. Shri Ramjilal Son Of Late Shri Nathuram, Resident Of Gram Badharna, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur (Raj.).

6. Smt. Ladi Devi Widow Of Shri Nathuram, Resident Of Gram Badharna, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur (Raj.).

7. Smt. Mota Alias Rameshwari D/o Late Shri Nathuram, W/o Shri Manak Chand, Resident Of Gram Khatipura, Tehsil Sanganer, District Jaipur.

8. Smt. Parwati Devi D/o Late Shri Nathurram, Wife Of Shri Purshottam Sharma, Resident Of Gram Moriza, Tehsil Chomu, District Jaipur.

9. Smt. Mohani Devi Widow Of Nanuram S/o Shri Nathuram, Resident Of Gram Badharna, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur (Raj.).

10. Shri Prahalad Kumar Son Of Late Shri Nanuram, Grandson Of Late Shri Nathuram, Resident Of Gram Badharna, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur (Raj.).

11. Shri Vinod Kumar Son Of Late Shri Nanuram Grandson Of Late Shri Nathuram, Resident Of Gram Badharna, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur (Raj.).

12. Menka D/o Late Shri Nanuram, Granddaughter Of Shri [2025:RJ-JP:17986] (2 of 6) [CR-5/2023] Nathuram, Resident Of Gram Badharna, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur.

13. Shri Kaluram Son Of Late Shri Om Prakash, Resident Of Gram Badharna, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur (Raj.).

14. Shri Bhagwansahai Son Of Late Shri Om Prakash, Resident Of Gram Badharna, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur (Raj.).

15. Shri Laxminaryan Son Of Late Shri Om Prakash, Resident Of Gram Badharna, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur (Raj.).

16. Shri Rajendra, Son Of Late Shri Om Prakash, Resident Of Gram Badharna, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur (Raj.).

17. Shri Ramkishore Son Of Late Shri Om Prakash, Resident Of Gram Badharna, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur (Raj.).

18. Shri Surendra Son Of Late Shri Om Prakash, Resident Of Gram Badharna, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur (Raj.).

19. Smt. Badami Devi D/o Late Shri Om Prakash, Wife Of Shri Girdharilal, Resident Of Gram Vimalpura, Thesil Chomu, District Jaipur.

20. Smt. Mangli Devi Widow Of Shyola Alias Shyonarayan, “Deceased While suit”

21. Shri Ramnaryan Son Of Late Shri Shyola Alias Shyonarayan, Resident Of Gram Badharna, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur (Raj.).

22. Shri Kanhiyalal Son Of Late Shri Shyola Alias Shyonarayan, Resident Of Gram Badharna, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur (Raj.).

23. Shri Mohanlal Son Of Late Shri Shyola Alias Shyonarayan, Resident Of Gram Badharna, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur (Raj.).

24. Shri Sharvanlal Son Of Late Shri Shyola Alias Shyonarayan, Resident Of Gram Badharna, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur (Raj.).

25. Shriram Son Of Late Shri Shyola Alias Shyonarayan, Resident Of Gram Badharna, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur (Raj.).

26. Smt. Prabhati Devi D/o Late Shri Shyola, Wife Of Shri Gopalal, Resident of Gram Siwar, Tehsil And District Jaipur. [2025:RJ-JP:17986] (3 of 6) [CR-5/2023]

27. Smt. Nanchi Devi, D/o Late Shri Shyola, Wife Of Shri Prabhunaryan, Resident Of Siwar, Tehsil And District Jaipur (Raj.).

28. Smt. Kamli Devi D/o Late Shri Shyola Wife Of Shri Ramlal, Resident Of Gram Hardatpura, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur.

29. Smt. Shanti Devi D/o Late Shri Shyola, Wife Of Ramswaroop, Resident Of Gram Hardatpura, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur.

30. Smt. Meera Devi D/o Late Shri Shyola, Wife Of Shri Dinesh Sharma, Resident Of Gram Luniavas, Tehsil Sanganer, District Jaipur.

31. State Of Rajasthan, Through Tehsildar, Amer, District Jaipur.

32. Deputy Registrar, Amer, Tehsil Amer, District Jaipur.

33. Shri Mahaveer Yadav Son Of Rameshwar Yadav, Resident Of Plot No.25, Madan Vihar, Dadi Phatak, Murlipura, Jaipur. Kathik Mantri, Vijaypura Grah Nirmansahakari Samiti Limited, Jaipur.

34. Shri Tarachand Saini S/o Sohanlal Saini, R/o Palniche Ki Dhani, Kasba Amer,tehsil Amer, District Jaipur (Raj.). ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. R.K. Agarwal, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Adhiraj Modi Mr. Abhishek Pareek For Respondent(s) : Mr. A.K. Sharma, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Madhav Dadhich Mr. Harsh Sharma HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA Judgment Date of Judgment :: 06/05/2025 This civil revision petition has been filed by the petitioner- defendant No.13 (for short ‘the defendant’) against the order dated 11.11.2022 passed by the Additional District Judge No.4, Jaipur District, Jaipur in civil suit No. 24/2019 whereby the [2025:RJ-JP:17986] (4 of 6) [CR-5/2023] application filed by the defendant under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC has been dismissed. Learned senior counsel for the defendant submits that respondent No.1-plaintiff (for short ‘the plaintiff’) filed a suit against the defendant and respondent Nos. 2 to 34 for cancelling the partition deed dated 11.10.1980 and the judgment and decree dated 22.02.2001 passed by the Assistant Collector. Learned senior counsel further submits that the defendant filed an application before the trial Court under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC mentioning therein that no cause of action accrued to the plaintiff for filing the present suit because judgment and decree dated

22.02.2001 passed by the Assistant Collector was affirmed by the Revenue Appellate Authority and later on it was also affirmed by the Board of Revenue vide order dated 19.03.2020. Learned senior counsel further submits that father of plaintiff- Kanhaiya Lal Sharma is still alive and he has not challenged the orders of the Revenue courts. Revenue court had decided the matter finally, so, plaintiff had no right to file the present suit. Learned senior counsel further submits that without getting declared the khatedari right, present suit was not maintainable. So, the order dated 11.11.2022 passed by the trial Court be set aside and the suit filed by the plaintiff be dismissed for want of cause of action. Learned senior counsel for the defendant has placed reliance on the following judgments:- (1) ‘Anil Sharma Vs. Smt. Mamta Sharma’, in Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1239/06, decided on 14.02.2008 (2) ‘Kamla Prasad and Ors. Vs. Kishna Kant Pathak and Ors.’, reported in (2007) 4 SCC 213 [2025:RJ-JP:17986] (5 of 6) [CR-5/2023] (3) ‘Narendra Singh and Ors. Vs. Jai Bhagwan and Ors.’, reported in (2005) 9 SCC 157. Learned senior counsel for the plaintiff has opposed the arguments advanced by counsel for the defendant and submits that defendant filed by the application for causing delay in the suit proceedings. Learned senior counsel further submits that suit is pending before the trial Court since 2018. Previously, defendant also raised question of limitation and the said application filed by the defendant was dismissed. Learned senior counsel further submits that allegation of plaintiff in the plaint is that defendant by way of collusion procured the decree from the revenue courts fraudulently. Therefore, only the civil court had jurisdiction to set aside the decree which was fraudulently obtained from the revenue court. So, the trial court rightly came to the conclusion that cause of action is a mixed question of fact and law and it would be decided after evidence of the parties. Thus, the present petition being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed. Learned senior counsel for the plaintiff has placed reliance on the following judgments:- (1) ‘Vaish Aggarwal Panchayat Vs. Inder Kumar and Ors.’, reported in 2015(9) Scale 270 (2) ‘Shobha Gaur Vs. Vidhyadhar Jat’, in Civil Revision Petition No. 167/2017 decided on 25.01.2024. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned senior counsel for the parties and perused the impugned order. It is an admitted position that while deciding the application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, averments made in the plaint are to be considered. Plaintiff, in his plaint, alleged that defendant by [2025:RJ-JP:17986] (6 of 6) [CR-5/2023] way of collusion obtained the decree from the revenue court fraudulently. So, in my considered opinion, trial Court has rightly came to the conclusion that cause of action is a mixed question of law and fact, which would be decided after the evidence of the parties. So, the present revision petition being devoid of merit, is liable to be dismissed, which stands dismissed accordingly. Pending application(s), if any, also stand(s) disposed of. Ritu/106 (NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J