Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Punma Ram vs Bhanwara Ram (2023:Rj-Jd:35431) on 17 October, 2023
Bench: Rekha Borana
[2023:RJ-JD:35431]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 220/2022
1. Punma Ram S/o Bhagaram, Aged About 40 Years, Mother
Of Keshardevi @ Kehri Devi, By Caste Jat, R/o Joraniyo Ki
Dhani, Tehsil Gida, Distt. Barmer.
2. Smt. Chunkidevi W/o Tejaram, Aged About 39 Years, By
Caste Meghwal, R/o Madruponiyo Ki Dhani (Panawada),
Tehsil Baytu Distt. Barmer.
----Petitioners
Versus
1. Bhanwara Ram S/o Mula Ram, By Caste Jat, R/o
Kasumbala Mahechan, Tehsil Gida Distt. Barmer.
2. Dhanna Ram S/o Mularam, By Caste Jat, R/o Kasumbala
Mahechan, Tehsil Gida Distt. Barmer.
3. State Of Rajasthan, Through
3/1 Tehsildar Gida, District Barmer.
3/2 Deputy Registrar Gida, Distt. Barmer.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sanjay Gupta through VC
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA
Judgment
17/10/2023
1. The present revision petition has been filed against the order
dated 04.07.2022 passed by the Additional District Judge No.1,
Barmer in Civil Suit No.30/2022 whereby the application under
Order 7 Rule 11, CPC as filed by the defendant No.1 has been
rejected.
2. A suit was filed by the plaintiffs for substitution of their name
in the registered sale deed on basis of preferential right and the
right of pre-emption. In the said suit, an application under Order 7
Rule 11, CPC was preferred by defendant No.1 with the
[2023:RJ-JD:35431] (2 of 3) [CR-220/2022]
submission that there is no cause of action to the plaintiffs to file
the present suit. Plaintiff Bhanwara Ram himself had earlier filed a
revenue suit which he withdrew after a compromise entered into
with defendant No.1 Punma Ram. In terms of compromise, Punma
Ram was given the authority to transfer his 1/5 th share in the land.
After having relinquished his rights, no right survives to Bhanwara
Ram to pray for the present reliefs and hence, the present suit is
devoid of any cause of action so as to maintain the present suit.
3. The second ground raised was that a second revenue suit
has again been filed by the present plaintiffs which fact has been
concealed in the present suit and those proceedings being the
subsequent proceedings, the proceedings in the present suit
deserve to be stayed.
4. The Court below proceeded on to reject the application as
filed by defendant No.1 with the specific observation that the
averments as made in the plaint did constitute of a cause of action
to the plaintiffs. To conclude the same, the Court took into
consideration, the pleadings of the plaintiffs to the effect that the
earlier suit was withdrawn by the plaintiffs on the assurance of the
defendant that he would transfer the property in favour of the
plaintiffs. But subsequently, he breached the promise and sold it
to defendant No.2.
Further, it has specifically been averred in the plaint that the
defendants had threatened the plaintiffs to dispossess them
forcibly from the land in question.
5. So far as the prayer for staying of the suit proceedings is
concerned, the Court below observed that the suit before the
Revenue Court was for partition and declaration of khatedari rights
[2023:RJ-JD:35431] (3 of 3) [CR-220/2022]
whereas the present suit is for substitution of name in the sale
deed.
The Court held that both the proceedings are for different
reliefs therefore, the suit proceedings cannot be stayed.
6. In the specific opinion of this Court, the findings as arrived
by the Court below are totally in consonance with the material
available on record as well as the law governing the provision of
Order 7 Rule 11, CPC. Further, this Court is not inclined to
interfere in the order impugned also for the reason that the Court
below has specifically observed that the defendant would be at
liberty to raise all the objections in his written statement and the
same could be decided after issues being framed qua the same.
7. In view of the above observations, this Court does not find
any ground to interfere with the impugned order. Hence, the
present revision petition is dismissed.
8. Stay petition and all pending applications, if any, also stand
dismissed.
(REKHA BORANA),J
5-KashishS/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
