Rajasthan High Court
Smt Shakuntla W/O Late Shri Mahtab ... vs Memar Singh S/O Shriram on 29 July, 2022
Bench: Mahendar Kumar Goyal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13628/2021
1. Smt Shakuntla W/o Late Shri Mahtab Singh,
2. Ravindra Singh S/o Mahtab Singh,
3. Sursh S/o Shri Mahtab Singh,
R/o Gangarsauli, Tehsil Kumher, District Bharatpur.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. Memar Singh S/o Shriram,
2. Babu Singh S/o Bhanwar Singh,
3. Man Singh S/o Bhanwar Singh,
4. Thakuriya S/o Bhanwar Singh,
5. Roshan Singh S/o Bhanwar Singh,
6. Manja W/o Gyan Singh Daughter In Law Kallan Singh,
All R/o Village Gangarsauli, Panchayat Samiti Sait, Tehsil
Kumher, District Bharatpur.
------Respondents/Applicants
7. Gram Panchayat Sait, Through Sarpanch, Gram
Panchayat Sait, Tehsil Kumher, District Bharatpur.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. J.K. Moolchandani
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Tapeshwar Pal Singh Parmar and
Mr. N.C. Sharma
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
Order
29/07/2022
This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of
India has been filed by the petitioners assailing the legality and
validity of the order dated 07.09.2021 passed by the Board of
Revenue Rajasthan, Ajmer (for brevity, 'the BoR') in Revision
Petition No. LR/2454/2012/Bharatpur whereby, an application filed
by the respondents-applicants under Order 1 Rule 10 read with
Section 151 CPC has been allowed.
(2 of 3) [CW-13628/2021]
The facts in brief are that during pendency of aforesaid
revision petition arising out of mutation proceedings, filed by the
petitioners against the respondent no.7, the respondents-
applicants filed an application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC seeking
their impleadment. The application has been allowed by the BoR
vide order dated 07.09.2021, the subject matter of challenge.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that since
interest of the respondents-applicants in the subject land is being
watched by the by the respondent no.7, the Gram Panchayat, the
applicants were not required to be impleaded as parties. Drawing
attention of this Court towards the order dated 30.05.2003 passed
by the learned Court of Sub Divisional Officer, Kumher in a
revenue suit filed by the petitioners, learned counsel submitted
that therein also, a similar application filed by the respondents-
applicants under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC was dismissed. He,
therefore, prayed that the writ petition be allowed, the order
dated 07.09.2021 be quashed and set aside and the application
filed by the respondents-applicants under Order 1 Rule 10 read
with Section 151 CPC be dismissed. He, in support of his
submissions, relies upon a judgment of this Court in case of
Paramjeet Kaur & Anr. vs. Civil Judge (Senior Division) and
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raisinghnagar, Distt.
Sriganganagar & Ors.: 2017(4) DNJ (Raj.) 1735.
Per contra, learned counsels for the respondents submitted
that they have acquired interest in the subject property during
pendency of the revision petition inasmuch as the Gram Panchayat
has issued its patta in their favour. They submitted that being
assignee of the property during pendency of the revision petition,
(3 of 3) [CW-13628/2021]
they have rightly been impleaded as parties. Qua the order dated
30.05.2003 passed by the learned Court of Sub Divisional Officer,
Kumher, learned counsels submitted that the application dismissed
therein was not moved by the present applicants. They, therefore,
prayed for dismissal of the writ petition.
Heard. Considered.
Indisputably, the respondents-applicants have acquired
interest in the subject property during pendency of the revision
petition by issuance of pattas by the Gram Panchayat in their
favour. Thus, being assignee of the property in dispute during
pendency of the litigation, in the considered opinion of this Court,
the BoR did not err in allowing the application filed by them
seeking their impleadment.
The judgment relied upon by the learned counsel for the
petitioners is of little help to them inasmuch as in that case,
learned trial Court has dismissed the application filed by the
petitioners seeking their impleadment inasmuch as their interest
was already being watched by their father, the plaintff. No such
situation is obtaining in the present case.
The BoR has passed the order dated 07.09.2021 in exercise
of its judicious discretion based on material on record which does
not warrant any interference of this Court under its writ
jurisdiction.
Resultantly, this writ petition is dismissed being devoid of
merit.
(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J
MADAN/46
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
