LALA & ANR. Vs. RAGHUNATH & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard learned counsel for the appellants.

(2.) This Special Appeal arises out of the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 20th May, 2014 by which he has dismissed the writ petition against the order passed by the Board of Revenue on a review petition.

(3.) The suit filed by the elder brother of petitioners under Sections 88 and 188 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act in the year 1976 in the Revenue Court, was decreed on the ground that he was recorded as a khatedar and was in continuous cultivatory possession. A First Appeal and thereafter a Second Appeal was dismissed by Board of Revenue against the judgment disbelieving the plea of the appellant in the written statement that father of the plaintiff was cultivating the land and on his death, both the brothers had inherited tenency rights. In a writ petition filed against the concurrent judgments, some documents were filed by the appellant that the land was held by the father of two brothers. These documents were obtained from the library of the Jagirdar. The documents were taken on record on 9.11.2011 by allowing the application. Deciding the writ petition, the learned Single Judge held that the suit was filed in the year 1976 and that grand father of the present petitioners had deposed in support of the written statement, but the concurrent findings were recorded by the courts below, which did not suffer from any perversity for judicial review under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India. Learned counsel for the petitioners alleged that the effect of the documents be considered, for which he may be permitted to file review petition before the Board of Revenue. Learned Single Judge accepted the request for liberty and permitted the petitioners to file a review petition alongwith an application for condonation of delay. The certified copies of the documents, which the petitioners wanted to place in the writ petition, were directed to be returned on furnishing xerox copies.