LAWS(RAJ)-2022-5-324

POLA RAM Vs. SEETA

Decided On May 18, 2022
Pola Ram Appellant
V/S
Seeta Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The instant civil revision petition under Sec. 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 has been preferred by the defendants-petitioners against the Order dtd. 11/4/2022 passed by the Senior Civil Judge, Jodhpur Metropolitan in Civil Suit No. 05/2022 titled as "Smt. Seeta v. Polaram and Ors.", whereby the application under Order VII, Rule 11 read with Sec. 151 of C.P.C. filed by the defendants-petitioners has been rejected.

(2.) The facts of the case in short are that the plaintiff-Seeta (respondent No. 1 herein) filed the civil suit for cancellation of relinquish deed executed in favour of the defendants on the ground that on said relinquish deed, signature of the plaintiff was obtained by the defendants by playing fraud. She came to know about fraud when she obtained certified copies of the revenue record. The plaintiff further averred that on the basis of so-called relinquish deed, defendants may transfer her share in the agricultural land. Hence, she has prayed to declare disputed relinquish deed as null and void with consequential relief not to transfer share of the plaintiff in the agricultural land in question. During pendency of the suit, defendants (petitioners herein) filed an application under Order VII, Rule 11 read with Sec. 151 of C.P.C. on the ground that since relinquish deed relates to agricultural land, hence, only revenue court has jurisdiction to entertain the suit. After hearing the parties, the trial court vide Order dtd. 11/4/2022 has dismissed the said application with the observation that plaintiff has not sought declaration of her khatedari rights; she has filed the suit for declaring disputed relinquish deed dtd. 8/7/2020 alleged to be prepared fraudulently by the defendants, as null and void. The above relief cannot be granted by the revenue court. Aggrieved with the above order, this revision petition has been filed by the defendants-petitioners before this Court.

(3.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the material available on record.