RAM CHANDRA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this special appeal filed under Rule 134 of the Rajasthan High Court Rules read with Article 225 of the Constitution of India, the appellant Ramchandra has challenged the judgment dated 2.3.2006 passed in SBCWP No. 5592/1994 and order dated 6.8.2008 passed by the learned Single Judge in Review Petition No. 02311/2008 (DRJ). The learned Single Judge allowed the S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5592/1994 filed by the respondents vide judgment dated 2.3.2006 and set aside the judgments dated 14.11.1994 passed by the Board of Revenue and judgment dated 18.8.1990 passed by the Revenue Appellate Authority, Bikaner and the judgment and decree dated 30.4.1990 passed by the Assistant Collector, Sujangarh and dismissed the suit filed by the appellant-plaintiff Ramchandar. The review petition filed by the appellant-petitioner was also dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide order dated 6.8.2008.

(2.) As per facts of the case, Smt. Mohini Devi wife of late Partu Ram and mother of the appellant instituted a suit No. 83/73 in the court of SDO, Ratangarh claiming declaration of Khatedari rights in dispute situated in Khasra No. 91 ad measuring 40 bighas and 4 biswas in village Chandawas on the ground that land in question was khatedari land of her father-in-law but it was mortgaged with Sh. Hema Ram (father of the petitioner-respondent). The said Sh. Hema Ram obtained Khatedari right of said land on 10.7.1959 and her father-in-law died 17 years ago and my husband Hukuma Ram died before 11 years, therefore, myself and my minor children being legal heirs of late Hukuma Ram son of Sanwala Ram are entitled to challenge the said Khatedari rights granted in favour of Hema Ram (father of respondent). The said suit filed by Mohini Devi was dismissed for want of prosecution by the SDO, Ratangarh vide order dated 24.8.1976. The appellant Ramchandra who was respondent No. 5 in the writ petition is the youngest son of smt. Mohini Devi, respondent No. 7 of the writ petition, for the cause which was subject matter of the suit filed by Smt. Mohini Devi (mother) preferred another suit before the Assistant Collector, Sujangarh in the year 1980. In the suit, the appellant-plaintiff claimed that his grand-father Hukma Ram was khatedar tenant of the land in dispute in the revenue records of Samwat Year 2011-12 and Hema Ram illegally obtained Khatedari right on 10.7.1959, therefore, on the aforesaid ground sought declaration of Khatedari rights for disputed land for himself and for his mother Smt. Mohni Devi and brother Triloka Ram and also claimed for restitution of possession over the land in dispute by evicting Hema Ram. During the pendency of the said suit pending before the Assistant Collector, Sujangarh, Hema Ram died, therefore, respondents-petitioners were substituted as legal representatives of late Hema Ram.

(3.) In the suit, a written statement was filed by the respondent stating therein that they are in cultivatory possession over the land as Khatedar tenant since 10.7.1959 (Samwat Year 2001) after acquiring khatedari rights as per provision of Section 15 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1955 for short) on its coming into force on 15.10.1955. A ground of principle of res-judicata and limitation was also raised in the written statement, but after framing issues, the Assistant Collector, Sujangarh decreed the suit in favour of the appellant Ramchandra vide judgment dated 30.7.1990.