MANOJ SHARMA Vs. PANKAJ SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been filed by the petitioners against the order dtd. 30/7/2016 passed by Civil Judge, Sambhar Lake, Jaipur in Civil Suit No.72/2016, whereby the application filed by the petitioners under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC has been dismissed.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that respondent No.1 filed a suit for declaration of relinquishment deed dtd. 12/9/2013 as null and void, partition and bounds and permanent injunction regarding property mentioned in para No.1 of the plaint which was purchased by his grandfather late Sh.Ramnath Sharma. Learned counsel for the petitioners also submits that petitioners had filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC before the trial court. Trial court wrongly dismissed the application filed by the petitioners vide order dtd. 30/7/2016. Learned counsel for the petitioners also submits that respondent No.1 had no right to bring a suit claiming his right in his grandfather's intestate property, whereas his father respondent No.2 is alive because Sec. 8 of Hindu Succession Act, 1956 bars right of other heirs if heirs of first degree are present and schedule 1 of the Act of 1956 excludes child of child or grandchild of child from schedule 1 but includes child of predeceased child or child of predeceased grandchild as heirs of 1st degree. So, the trial court wrongly came to the conclusion that matter would be adjudicated after taking the evidence of the parties.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance upon the following judgments : (1) Commissioner of Wealth Tax, Kanpur & Ors. Vs. Chander Sen & Ors. reported in (1986) 3 SCC 567; (2) Mahendra Kumar Vs. Mohd. Salim & Ors. reported in 2014 WLC (Raj.) UC 504; (3) Uttam Vs. Saubhag Singh & Ors. reported in 2016 (2) CDR 324 (SC) and (4) Surender Kumar Vs. Dhani Ram & Ors. reported in AIR 2016 Delhi 120.