Neeta Garg vs State Of Raj And Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 1034 Raj/2

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 1034 Raj/2
Judgement Date : 31 January, 2023

Rajasthan High Court

Neeta Garg vs State Of Raj And Ors on 31 January, 2023

Bench: Sameer Jain

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

              S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8062/2016

Neeta Garg
                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                   Versus
State Of Raj And Ors
                                                                ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashish Kishore Saksena For Respondent(s) : Mr. Shobhit Vyas Ms. Sakshi Tiwari for Mr. Abhi Goyal Mr. Haritabh Kumar Aditya, Dy.

Commissioner, ADA

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAMEER JAIN

Order

31/01/2023

At the outset, it is pertinent to note that vide order dated

17.01.2023, this Court had directed the Commissioner of ADA to

mark his presence before the Court with the relevant and

necessary record of the case. Thereafter, in compliance of the said

order, Mr. Haritabh Kumar Aditya, Dy. Commissioner, ADA has

marked his presence before the Court, who has claimed himself to

be the competent authority to assist the Court in the present

matter.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn the attention of

this court to the order dated 07.03.1968. The relevant part of

which is reproduce as under:-

"For the reasons given above the land of Khasra Nos. 2189, 2213, 2212, 2215, 2190/7954, 2211, 2188, 2210, 396, 338, 394 and 341 along with land and house purchased from A. A Philips and Chand Mal are declared as personal properties of the applicant and

(2 of 3) [CW-8062/2016]

the rest of land in applicant's khata are his khud kast land."

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that qua

Khasra No. 394, it was held by the court that the same was the

personal property of the applicant. Furthermore, learned counsel

placed reliance upon the order of the Additional Civil Judge, Serial

No. 2, Ajmer dated 18.02.1995. The relevant discussion and

finding therein is reproduced as under:-

"mijksDr lk{; ds vk/kkj ij ;g ns[kuk gS fd D;k izfroknh uxj lq/kkj U;kl dks oknxzLr Hkwfe dks cspus ;k uhyke djus dk vf/kdkj gS ;k ughaA pwafd ;g fook|d oknh dks lkfcr djuk FkkA oknh lk{kh ls bl Hkwfe dks izn'kZ&2 ds ek/;e ls futh lEifRr [kksuk dfFkr fd;k gSA izn'kZ&2 enuxksiky cuke jkT; ds okn esa U;k;ky; vfrfjDr ftyk/kh'k vtesj us vius vkns'k fnukad 7-3-68 }kjk oknxzLr Hkwfe [kljk ua- 394 dks futh lEifRr gksuk ?kksf"kr fd;k gS vkSj oknh us ;g Hkwfe mDr okn esa futh lEifRr ?kksf"kr gksus ds i'pkr [kjhnh gS] blds vfrfjDr oknxzLr Hkwfe dh tekcanh lEor~ 2022&2025 esa oknh 'kqHkukjk;.k ds uke gLrkUrfjr gksuk vafdr gSA ;g tekcanh Lo;a izfroknh us izLrqr dh gSA blds vfrfjDr jkti= izn'kZ v 2 esa [kljk ua- 394 dk mYys[k ugha fd;k x;k gSA vr% [kljk ua- dk mYys[k uk gksus ds dkj.k ;g ugha ekuk tk ldrk fd mDr [kljk ua- dh Hkwfe uxj lq/kkj U;kl dh oS'kkyh uxj ;kstuk ds vUrxZr vkrh gksA bl izdkj oknxzLr Hkwfe izn'kZ&1 ds ek/;e ls [kjhn dh x;h ftls izn'kZ&2 }kjk la{ksi U;k;ky; us futh lEifRr ekuk vkSj izn'kZ&v 1 tekcUnh tks Lo;a izfroknh us izLrqr dh gS] esa oknh 'kqHkukjk;.k dk uke vafdr gS rFkk oknh fook|d la- 1 esa viuk dCtk izekf.kr dj pqdk gS ogka izfroknh dks oknxzLr Hkwfe dks uhyke djus vkSj cspus dk vf/kdkj ugha gSA vr% ;g fook|d oknh ds i{k esa vkSj izfroknh ds fo:) fuf.kZr fd;k tkrk gSA "

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in light

of the said judgment, the auction conducted by the respondent-

ADA was a nullity as they had no right to conduct the auction

upon the said property. Learned counsel for the petitioner has

further placed reliance upon Annexure-8 i.e. application filed by

UIT under Section 151 of CPC wherein it was categorically

submitted that they had not carried out any auction proceedings

(3 of 3) [CW-8062/2016]

or transferred, alienated and/or acquired any property, which is a

part of the present dispute. The said application filed by the UIT

is dehors of the letter dated 12.04.1990, issued by the UIT in

respect of plot No. B-25.