PARAS MAL Vs. SOBHAG DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this writ petition is to the judgment dated May 1, 1999 of the Board of Revenue whereby it was held that if during the pendency of revenue suit, sale deed of the land is executed it is hit by the doctrine of lis pendens and it is not necessary to get the sale deed set aside by Civil Court.

(2.) Contextual facts depict that Smt. Sobhag Devi (plaintiff) filed a suit for declaration, injunction and possession initially against Prem Devi (defendant No. 1) in the Court of Assistant Collector Dudu with the averments that the agricultural land bearing khasra No. 1225 measuring 4 bighas 6 biswas and khasra No. 1232 measuring 4 bighas 14 biswas situated in village Dudu was in joint khatedari of Padam Chand and Paras Mal. After the death of Padam Chand name of his wife Prem Devi (defendant No. 1 was substituted in revenue record. The plaintiff claimed in the suit that being the mother of Prem Chand she was also entitled to equal share as per the provisions of Hindu Succession Act.

(3.) On or about November 26, 1990 the plaintiff moved an application under Order 1. Rule 10 read with Order 6, Rule 17 Civil Procedure Code, wherein it was stated that Prem Devi executed sale deed on October 15, 1990 whereby she sold her share in the aforesaid agricultural land to Paras Mai and Pawan Kumar. The plaintiff sought impleadrnent of the purchasers of the land. The purchasers were impleaded as defendants and they filed written statement stating therein that sale deed was rightly executed and until and unless the sale deed was cancelled by the Civil Court no relief could be granted by Revenue Court. On the basis of pleadings of parties as many as 10 issues were framed, out which issue No. 9 was as under :- "Whether the revenue Court has jurisdiction to try the suit?"