Bajrang Lal S/O Shri Lal vs Board Of Revenue
2022 Latest Caselaw 2077 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

                S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10378/2019

Bajrang Lal S/o Shri Lal, Aged About 62 Years, R/o Sripura,
Tehsil Pipalda, District Kota.
                                                                    ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
1.      Board Of Revenue, Rajasthan, Ajmer Through Its Member.
2.      Revenue Appellate Authority, Kota.
3.      Sub-Divisional Officer, Itava, Kota.
4.      Bhuli Bai
5.      Badri Bai
6.      Jagganathi Bai
7.      Ram Bharosi
        4 to 7 daughters Of Late Ratni, R/o Sripura, Tehsil
        Pipalda, District Kota.
8.      Ram Ratan S/o Mulya,
9.      Ram Gopal S/o Mulya,
10.     Mahaveer S/o Rampal
11.     Smt. Gutti W/o Late Rampal,
        R/o Sripura, Tehsil Pipalda, District Kota.
12.     State Of Rajasthan Through Tehsildar, Pipalda, District
        Kota.
                                                                 ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Prem Kumar Sharma, Adv.

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR GAUR

Order

08/03/2022

The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner-

plaintiff, challenging the order dated 03.04.2019 passed by the

Board of Revenue, Ajmer.

(2 of 3) [CW-10378/2019]

The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner had filed a

suit for declaration and correction of entries before the Sub

Divisional Magistrate, Kota and the said suit was later on

transferred to Sub Divisional Officer, Itava, Kota.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the suit of

the petitioner was decreed on 07.07.2006 by Sub Divisional

Officer, Itava, Kota.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the suit

was put to challenge by the defendants-respondents before the

Revenue Appellate Authority and the Revenue Appellate Authority

vide its order dated 13.07.2011 allowed the appeal in part and

set-aside the judgment and decree dated 07.07.2006 and matter

was remanded back to the Sub Divisional Officer for deciding the

suit afresh after affording proper opportunity to all the parties and

further to lead the evidence.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the said

order was put to challenge by the petitioner before the Board of

Revenue in Second Appeal and Board of Revenue vide its order

dated 03.04.2019 has upheld the order of the Appellate Court.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Board

of Revenue, however, did not give any direction to decide the suit

in expeditious manner and as such the petitioner is constrained to

challenge the order before this Court.

I have heard the submissions made by learned counsel for

the petitioner.

This Court finds that after appeal of the defendants-

respondents being allowed vide order dated 13.07.2011, the case

was remitted back to the Sub Divisional Officer, Itava and suit is to

be tried there.

(3 of 3) [CW-10378/2019]

This Court does not find any error in the order passed by the

Board of Revenue.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, at this juncture,

submitted that if this Court is not inclined to interfere in the order

of Board of Revenue, at least, directions may be given to the Sub

Divisional Officer, Itava to dispose of the suit in expeditious

manner.

This Court finds that initially suit was filed by the petitioner

in the year 1993 and still the dispute has not come to an end.

This Court finds that the court below i.e. Sub Divisional

Officer, Itawa should make all endeavour to dispose of the suit in

expeditious manner and no unnecessary adjournments be granted

to all the parties.

Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of.

(ASHOK KUMAR GAUR),J

Ramesh Vaishnav /86/1

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)