YOGESH KUMAR PALIWAL Vs. SOMWATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner filed suit for the cancellation of the sale deed on the ground that the Respondents have executed the sale deed in the name of the Petitioner by committing fraud. The plaint has been returned on the ground that the suit was not maintainable and lies before the Revenue Court by the impugned order dated 17.9.2008 passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division), Firozabad. Against the said order, the Petitioner filed appeal, which has been dismissed.

(2.) Heard Sri K.K. Dubey, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Sri B.B. Paul, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the property in dispute is khata No. 294. The Petitioner is co-tenure holder of khata No. 294, which is apparent from the khatauni filed along with the supplementary affidavit dated 26.2.2009, which is not in dispute. It appears that on the basis of the said sale deed, the mutation has been carried on. The Petitioner moved an application before Tehsildar for the recalling of the ex parte order dated 15.1.2007, by which the order for the mutation has been passed. On 18.7.2008, the Tehsildar after hearing both the parties has recalled the ex parte order dated 15.11.2007 and proceeding for the mutation restored to its original number. He submitted that since the Petitioner's name is duly recorded in the revenue record as co-tenure holder, the civil suit lies in the Civil Court. In support of the contention he relied upon the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Shri Ram and Anr. v. Ist Additional District Judge and Ors.,2007 102 RevDec 374.