Dismissed

Arjun Lal and Others v. Surja Ram and Others

Rajasthan HC5 Jan 2015CR/92/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This civil revision rejected the contention that the Summary Suit for possession under Section 6 of the Specific Relief Act falls exclusively under Revenue Court jurisdiction. The court upheld the Trial Court's decision but directed disposal within one year.

What did the court decide?

Directions issued to expedite the matter pending before the Trial Court and finally decide the same within one year from the production of certified copy of this order.

Arjun Lal and Others Vs Surja Ram and Others — Property and Title | Rajasthan HC (2015)

¶1

¶2

I N THE HI GH COURT OF JUDI CATURE FOR RAJASTHAN JAI PUR BENCH, JAI PUR

¶3

S. B. Ci vi l Revi si on Pet i t i on No. 92/ 2014

¶4

Ar j un l al Or s. Vs. Sur j ar am & Or s.

¶5

Dat e of Or der : 05/ 01/ 2015

¶6

HON' BLE MR. JUSTI CE J. K. RANKA

¶7

Mr . Ami t Si ngh Shekhawat , f or t he pet i t i oner s.

¶8

Thi s r evi si on pet i t i on under sect i on 115 of Code of Ci vi l Pr ocedur e i s di r ect ed agai nst t he or der dt . 20/ 05/ 2014 wher eby t he l d. Tr i al Cour t , whi l e deci di ng t he i ssue No. 2 per t ai ni ng t o j ur i sdi ct i on of t he Cour t , hel d t hat t he Cour t was sei zed of t he j ur i sdi ct i on t o hear and deci de t he sui t f i l ed under sect i on 6 of t he Speci f i c Rel i ef Act , by t he r espondent - pl ai nt i f f .

¶9

I t i s t he cont ent i on of l d. Counsel f or t he pet i t i oner t hat t he l d. Tr i al Cour t commi t t ed a gr oss j ur i sdi ct i onal er r or i n passi ng t he i mpugned or der and hol di ng t hat t he mat t er i s t r i abl e by a Ci vi l Cour t .

¶10

Ld. Counsel f or t he pet i t i oner cont ends t hat t he mat t er per t ai ns t o t he agr i cul t ur al l and and such t ype of sui t s ar e onl y t r i abl e i n Revenue Cour t s and as such, t he or der i mpugned i s bad i n l aw and deser ves t o be set asi de. He al so i nvi t ed t hi s Cour t s' at t ent i on t owar ds sect i on 256 and sect i on 187B of t he Raj ast han Tenancy Act , 1955 and cont ended t hat by vi r t ue of t hese pr ovi si ons, j ur i sdi ct i on of Ci vi l Cour t i s oust ed and t her ef or e t he mat t er was

¶11

¶12

excl usi vel y t r i abl e by Revenue cour t s onl y.

¶13

I t can be not i ced on per usal of t he mat er i al avai l abl e on r ecor d t hat t he sui t f or possessi on under sect i on 6 of t he Speci f i c Rel i ef Act has been f i l ed by t he pl ai nt i f f - r espondent . I n t he sui t wr i t t en st at ement s wer e f i l ed and on t he basi s of pl eadi ngs, f our i ssues wer e f r amed. I ssue No. 2 f r amed i s t hat whet her t he Ci vi l Cour t has j ur i sdi ct i on t o deci de t he i ssue r el at i ng t o di sput ed agr i cul t ur al l and or not .

¶14

Af t er f r ami ng t he i ssues, an appl i cat i on was moved by t he pet i t i oner - def endant s st at i ng t her ei n t hat i ssue No. 2 r el at i ng t o j ur i sdi ct i on may be deci ded f i r st as a pr el i mi nar y i ssue, however , af t er hear i ng counsel f or t he par t i es, t he Tr i al Cour t r ej ect ed t he appl i cat i on as st at ed above.

¶15

Hear d t he l d. Counsel f or t he pet i t i oner and have gone t hr ough t he i mpugned or der and car ef ul l y per used t he var i ous pr ovi si ons of Raj ast han Tenancy Act . Ther e cannot be any doubt about t he l egal pr oposi t i on t hat t he j ur i sdi ct i on of a Ci vi l Cour t i s not r eadi l y i nf er r ed. The sui t pendi ng bef or e t he l d. Tr i al Cour t , i s a summar y sui t f i l ed under sect i on 6 of t he Speci f i c Rel i ef Act . The i nvest i gat i on war r ant ed under sect i on 6 of t he Speci f i c Rel i ef Act ar e wel l def i ned. I t i s a summar y sui t f or possessi on based on pr evi ous possessi on and not a t i t l e sui t . The Cour t has t o onl y see whet her t he pl ai nt i f f was i n pr i or possessi on of t he di sput ed pr oper t y and whet her he was di s- possessed i n accor dance wi t h l aw or not .

¶16

¶17

I n t he i nst ant case, t he Tr i al Cour t whi l e

¶18

deci di ng t he pr el i mi nar y i ssue of j ur i sdi ct i on agai nst t he pet i t i oner - def endant , has cat egor i cal l y obser ved t hat t he quest i on of possessi on has t o be r esol ved i n t he l i ght of sal e deeds dt . 16/ 06/ 2009 and 01/ 09/ 2009 and such t ype of i nqui r y pr i mar i l y f al l s wi t hi n t he domai n of t he Ci vi l Cour t and t her ef or e, t he Tr i al Cour t deci ded t he i ssue of j ur i sdi ct i on agai nst t he pet i t i oner s. Thi s Cour t does not f i nd any j ur i sdi ct i onal er r or i n t he i mpugned or der and as such no i nt er f er ence i s cal l ed f or under t he l i mi t ed j ur i sdi ct i on vest ed under sect i on 115 of Code of Ci vi l Pr ocedur e. However , i n t he i nt er est of j ust i ce and keepi ng i n mi nd t he l i mi t ed scope of t he summar y sui t under sect i on 6 of t he Speci f i c Rel i ef Act , t hi s Cour t f eel s appr opr i at e t o i ssue di r ect i ons t o expedi t e t he mat t er pendi ng bef or e t he Tr i al Cour t and f i nal l y deci de t he same wi t hi n a per i od of one year f r om t he pr oduct i on of cer t i f i ed copy of t hi s or der .

¶19

The r evi si on pet i t i on, wi t h t he obser vat i ons/ di r ect i ons as i ndi cat ed above, st ands di sposed of .

¶20

S. Kumawat - 18

¶21

Cer t i f i cat e- Al l cor r ect i ons made i n t he j udgment / or der have been i ncor por at ed i n t he j udgment / or der bei ng e- mai l ed.

¶22

S. Kumawat Jr . P. A

Arjun Lal and Others v. Surja Ram and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arjun Lal and Others v. Surja Ram and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

C T O Kota Vs M/S Chambel Fertilizers and Chem

A C T O Jaipur Vs M/S S K Traders

Smt Deepika Kapoor and Ors. Vs Sampat Singh and Ors.

Benu Joshi Vs Gopal Singh Chauhan

Balu Ram Vs Smt Bholi Devi and Ors.

Satish Kumar Meena Vs State Revenu Departmentors