GOPAL Vs. MANOHAR LAL & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against order dated 6.5.16 of the Additional District Judge No. 2, Bhilwara in Civil Suit No. 89/13, whereby an application preferred by the petitioner-defendant under Order 7, Rule 11 CPC, seeking rejection of the plaint, has been dismissed.

(2.) The respondent-plaintiff filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction inter alia against the petitioner herein and UIT, Bhilwara, in respect of a plot ad measuring 60x85 sq. ft. purchased by him from its khatedar Ladulal s/o Barda Balai, which was surrendered to UIT, Bhilwara for change of land use i.e. from agriculture to residential. Precisely, the case of the petitioner is that after conversion/regularisation of the land, vide order dated 6.4.11, the lease deed executed in favour of the petitioner by the UIT stands duly registered on 18.9.12, however, on the objection being raised by the petitioner-defendant, the proceedings have been suspended by the UIT, Bhilwara. Accordingly, the plaintiff has sought declaration that plot in question is owned by him and the petitioner and the respondent no.2 herein, the defendants, have no right whatsoever over the same. That apart, the plaintiff has also sought permanent injunction against the defendants.

(3.) During the pendency of the petition, the petitioner herein, preferred an application under Order 7, Rule 11 CPC, seeking rejection of the plaint inter alia on the ground that against the proceedings taken by the UIT, the petitioner has preferred a revision petition before the Board of Revenue inasmuch as, on the basis of forged agreement, the land was regularised and lease deed was executed in favour of the respondent-plaintiff and therefore, the dispute raised being cognisable by Revenue Court, the suit as framed, is not maintainable before the Civil Court. That apart, the contention of the petitioner was that the land in question being khatedari land of a member of Scheduled Caste, the same could not have been purchased by the person, who is not the member of Scheduled Caste and therefore, the transaction in question is hit by Section 42 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 ( "Act of 1955').