Rajasthan High Court
Ramesh S/O Bajranglal vs Mahavir S/O Bhanwarlal on 7 September, 2022
Bench: Mahendar Kumar Goyal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8715/2022
1. Ramesh S/o Bajranglal, R/o Village-Bhyojada, Tehsil-
Chaksu, Distt.-Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. Manmohan S/o Lakshinarayan, R/o Village-Bhyojada,
Tehsil-Chaksu, Distt.-Jaipur, Rajasthan.
----Defendants/Petitioners
Versus
1. Mahavir S/o Bhanwarlal, R/o Village-Bhyojada, Tehsil-
Chaksu, Distt.-Jaipur, Rajasthan.
2. State Of Rajasthan, Through Tehsildar, Chaksu, Distt.-
Jaipur, Rajasthan.
----Plaintiff/Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. T.C.Sharma
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
Order
07/09/2022
This writ petition is directed against the judgment dated
28.04.2022 passed by the Board of Revenue, Rajasthan, Ajmer
(for brevity "the BoR") in second appeal No.602/2017 whereby,
while partly allowing the appeal against the judgment dated
20.01.2017 passed by the Revenue Appellate Authority in Appeal
No.186/2015 modifying the judgment and decree dated
07.05.2015 passed by the Court of Sub-Divisional Officer in Suit
No.91/2011 passing the final decree, the matter has been
remanded back to the learned trial Court to pass final decree
afresh.
(2 of 3) [CW-8715/2022]
The relevant facts in brief are that the respondent
No.1/plaintiff filed a suit for partition and permanent injunction
against the petitioners and the respondent No.2 wherein, a
preliminary decree of partition was passed on 05.12.2011
whereby, the Tehsildar, Chaksu was appointed as Commissioner to
prepare the proposal for preparation of final decree in presence of
both the parties. On the basis of report of the Tehsildar, a final
decree came to be passed vide judgment dated 07.05.2015 which
was assailed by the plaintiff by way of an appeal No.186/2015
which came to be decided by the Revenue Appellate Authority,
Jaipur vide its judgment dated 20.01.2017 modifying the final
decree passed by the learned trial Court. Still, being dissatisfied
with the judgment and decree dated 20.01.2017, the plaintiff
preferred a second appeal before the BoR which has partly been
allowed vide judgment and decree dated 28.04.2022 whereby, the
matter has been remanded back to the learned trial Court for
passing the final decree afresh.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the BoR
erred in remanding the matter back to the learned trial Court for
passing the final decree afresh. He submitted that the final decree
passed by the learned learned trial Court was based on report of
the Tehsildar and it was suitably modified by the Revenue
Appellate Authority in an appeal preferred by the respondent No.1.
He, therefore, prayed that the writ petition be allowed, the
judgment and decree dated 28.04.2022 be quashed and set aside
and the appeal preferred by the respondent No.1 be dismissed.
Heard. Considered.
The BoR has, while partly allowing the appeal preferred by
the respondent No.1, remanded the matter back to the learned
(3 of 3) [CW-8715/2022]
trial Court to pass the final decree afresh after seeking proposal
from the Tehsildar. It has been observed by the BoR in its
judgment that the report dated 02.01.2012 prepared by the
Patwari, which was forwarded by the Tehsildar to the learned trial
Court, was in violation of Rule 21 of the Rajasthan Tenancy
(Government) Rules, 1955. It is reflected from the report of
Patwari dated 02.01.2012 that it was prepared in absence of
parties to the litigation. The Tehsildar has simply forwarded the
report of Patwari and the final decree was passed by the learned
trial Court based on such report which was prepared in absence of
the parties.
Even otherwise also, there was a specific direction by the
learned trial Court vide it judgment 05.12.2011, while passing the
preliminary decree, to the Tehsildar, Chaksu to prepare the report
in presence of both the parties. In these circumstances, in the
considered opinion of this Court, the BoR did not err in passing the
judgment dated 28.04.2022.
The writ petition is dismissed accordingly being devoid of
merit.
(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J
Manish/84
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
