DURGAWATI Vs. RAMSAHAI MEENA ALIAS RAMSI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed the present writ petition with the prayer to quash and set aside the order dtd. 9/9/2016 passed by the Board of Revenue, Rajasthan, Ajmer (for short 'the Second Appellate Authority') in Appeal No.2295/2012, allowing the second appeal of the appellantrespondent/plaintiff- Ramsahai Meena and set aside the order dtd. 5/3/2012 passed by the Court of Revenue Appellate Authority, Jaipur (for short 'the First Appellate Authority') in Appeal No.405/2010/223, dismissing the appeal filed by the respondent/plaintiff- Ramsahai Meena against the order dtd. 15/11/2010 passed by the Court of Assistant Collector, Jaipur City (I) [for short 'the court below'], in Suit No.87/2010, whereby the application filed by the defendant No.1- Anandi Lal under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC was allowed and the suit filed by the respondent/plaintiff- Ramsahai Meena was dismissed being barred by law.

(2.) The brief facts of the case relevant for consideration of this Court are that the respondent/plaintiff- Ramsahai Meena filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction before the court below with the averements that he is in possession of the land in question since Samvat 2018 and the defendant No.1- Anandi Lal has wrongly got the land mutated in his name in the revenue record. The suit was filed by the respondent/plaintiffRamsahai Meena with a prayer that he may be declared as a khatedar tenant of the land in question and further the mutation in the name of defendant No.1- Anandi Lal be declared illegal and further prayed for permanent injunction that the defendant No.1- Anandi Lal may not be made the payment of compensation in lieu of the acquisition of the land in question.

(3.) Defendant No.1- Anandi Lal filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC stating that the property in question has been acquired by the Rajasthan Housing Board under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act of 1894') and the award has also been passed. As a consequence of the acquisition of the land, the land has vested with the Rajasthan Housing Board and the said land no more remains as an agricultural land, and therefore, the suit for declaration as a khatedari tenant is not maintainable. It was also stated that after acquisition of the land and passing of the award by the Competent Authority the respondent/plaintiffRamsahai Meena has a remedy of Reference before the Civil Court. It was prayed that the application filed by him under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC be allowed and the suit and the suit filed by the plaintiff/ respondent- Ramsahai Meena be dismissed being barred by law.