Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Sujan Singh @ Soorajmal vs Usab Kanwar (2025:Rj-Jd:45089) on 14 October, 2025
Author: Kuldeep Mathur
Bench: Kuldeep Mathur
[2025:RJ-JD:45089]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 52/2021
1. Sujan Singh @ Soorajmal S/o Ganesh Singh, Aged About
65 Years, Village Oadwada, Tehsil Aahore, Dis. Jalore
2. Keshar Singh S/o Ganesh Singh, Aged About 64 Years,
Village Oadwada, Tehsil Aahore, Dis. Jalore
3. Hari Singh @ Harchand S/o Bheem Singh, Aged About 64
Years, Village Oadwada, Tehsil Aahore, Dis. Jalore
----Appellants
Versus
1. Usab Kanwar W/o Arjun Singh, Village Oadwada, Tehsil
Aahore, Dis. Jalore
2. District Collector, District Collector, Jalore
3. Tehsildar, Ahore, District Jalore
4. Hanuman Singh S/o Ganesh Singh, Village Oadwada,
Tehsil Aahore, Dis. Jalore
5. Mangal Singh S/o Geeg Singh, Village Oadwada, Tehsil
Aahore, Dis. Jalore
6. Ram Singh S/o Bhanwar Singh, Village Oadwada, Tehsil
Aahore, Dis. Jalore
7. Bhur Singh S/o Bhanwar Singh, Village Oadwada, Tehsil
Aahore, Dis. Jalore
8. Nain Singh S/o Geeg Singh, Village Oadwada, Tehsil
Aahore, Dis. Jalore
9. Joriya S/o Jogiya Bheel, Village Oadwada, Tehsil Aahore,
Dis. Jalore
----Respondents
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Hemant Ballani
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajesh Choudhary
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP MATHUR
Order
14/10/2025
(Uploaded on 14/10/2025 at 04:57:11 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:45089] (2 of 3) [CSA-52/2021]
1. The present second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of
Civil Procedure has been filed by the plaintiffs- appellants against
the judgment and decree dated 20.01.2021 passed by the learned
District Judge, Jalore in Civil First Appeal No.12/2013 (CIS
No.110/2014) whereby, the judgment and decree dated
11.03.2013 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Jalore in Civil
Original Suit No.70/2007 was upheld and the first appeal has been
dismissed.
2. The facts, in brief for the present appeal are that the
plaintiff- respondent No.1 filed a suit seeking permanent
injunction against the appellants- defendants that they may be
restrained from blocking the public road and encroaching upon the
land of Khasra No.417 because of which she is not been able to
reach to her agricultural land of Khasra No.416. The learned Court
below has framed as many as four issues. While deciding the
issues No.1 to 3, learned Court below has held that on the land
adjacent to Khasra No.416, there is an open way which is being
used by respondent- plaintiff as a public way. In the revenue
records also, the land of Khasra No.417 has been entered as
gairmumkin rasta.
3. The appeal filed against the judgment and decree dated
11.03.2013 passed by the learned Court below has also been
dismissed by the learned Appellate Court vide its judgment and
decree dated 20.01.2021, affirming the findings of fact recorded
by the learned Court below. The learned Appellate Court after
considering the oral and documentary evidence available on
record in detail held that findings of fact as recorded by the
learned Court below are correct.
(Uploaded on 14/10/2025 at 04:57:11 PM)
[2025:RJ-JD:45089] (3 of 3) [CSA-52/2021]
4. Heard.
5. Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned
counsel for the parties and upon perusal of judgments impugned,
this Court is of the opinion that the learned Court below as well as
the learned Appellate Court has thoroughly considered the
documentary and oral evidence in its true perspective. The
learned counsel for the appellants has fail to point out any
perversity or illegality in the findings of fact recorded by the
learned Courts below. No question of law, much less, no
substantial question of law is involved in this second appeal which
requires adjudication by this Court, in the instant appeal filed
under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
6. There is no merit in the present second appeal, for which, it
is dismissed.
(KULDEEP MATHUR),J
24-divya/-
(Uploaded on 14/10/2025 at 04:57:11 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
