PUSHPA KANWAR Vs. GOMTI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. The present writ petition has been filed against the order dtd. 30/1/2025 passed by learned District Judge, Jaisalmer, whereby, the objection raised by the petitioners in the proceedings initiated by the respondent under Sec. 372 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1925') has been rejected.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the respondent has filed an application under Sec. 372 of the Act of 1925 and the same is pending consideration before the learned District Judge, Jaisalmer. Upon the issuance of a public notice, the petitioners raised the objections to the proceedings initiated in District Jaisalmer. The objections raised by the petitioners on the ground of jurisdiction were considered by learned District Judge, Jaisalmer and the same were rejected vide order dtd. 30/1/2025. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the village Tawriwala was initially located in District Jaisalmer but after the creation of District Phalodi, the same is now located in District Phalodi, therefore, District Judge, Jaisalmer had no jurisdiction to deal with the application preferred by the respondent under Sec. 372 of the Act of 1925. Learned counsel submits that a plain reading of Sec. 371, it is amply clear that that the application ought to have been filed in District Phalodi in whose jurisdiction, the Village Tawriwala falls now and, therefore, the District Judge, Jaisalmer has no jurisdiction to entertain the application preferred by the respondent. He, therefore, prays that the writ petition may be allowed and the order dtd. 30/1/2025 passed by learned District Judge, Jaisalmer may be quashed and set aside.

(3.) I have considered the submissions made at the Bar and gone through the relevant record of the case.