LAWS(RAJ)-2019-8-350

BHAGWATI KUNWAR Vs. GULAB SINGH

Decided On August 02, 2019
Bhagwati Kunwar Appellant
V/S
GULAB SINGH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner-defendants by these twin revision petitions have challenged two orders of even date, in different civil suits for cancellation of sale-deeds and perpetual injunction, passed by Addl. District Judge (Fast Track) No.5, Udaipur (for short, 'learned Court below'). As the lis involved and the plaintiff-respondents in both these revision petitions are common, both are heard together and disposed of by this single order.

(2.) The facts, in brief, are that plaintiff-respondents filed two civil suits for cancellation of sale-deeds and perpetual injunction against both the petitioner-defendants. In the civil suit, filed against petitioner Ms. Bhagwati Kanwar, besides perpetual injunction cancellation of sale-deed dated 1st of February, 2007 is sought precisely on the ground that the vendor had no right, title or interest to execute the sale-deed, whereas in civil suit filed against petitioner Smt. Shanker Kanwar, cancellation of sale-deed dated 12th of July 2007 is prayed besides perpetual injunction on identical grounds. In both the suits, along with the plaints, respondent-plaintiffs also filed application under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 CPC for temporary injunction. On behalf of petitioners, taking shelter of clause (d) of Rule 11 of Order 7 CPC separateapplications under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC were filed in both the suits. It is, inter alia, averred in the applications that the subject-matter of both the suits relate to agricultural land and the relief prayed for is declaratory as well as perpetual injunction, therefore, suits are barred by law and such suits can only be tried by revenue Courts. In the applications under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC, petitioners urged that a suit of such nature is maintainable only before the revenue Court under Sec. 207 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 (for short "Act") and suit before a civil Court is barred by law by virtue of Sec. 256 of the Act.

(3.) Both the respondent-plaintiffs contested the applications submitted on behalf the petitioners.