Dismissed

Yogendra Singh and Ors. v. Rajendra Singh and Ors.

Rajasthan HC17 Jan 2018CW/753/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging a Board of Revenue order confirming unconditional executability of a civil decree. The court held the decree became final upon dismissal of appeal in default, rejecting claims of a missing settlement bond. Petition dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; petitioner at liberty to pursue the case to save the appeal if permissible.

Yogendra Singh and Ors. Vs Rajendra Singh and Ors. — Land Acquisition | Rajasthan HC (2018)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 753 / 2018

¶3

Yogendra Singh S/o Kishan Singh, by Caste Rajput, Aged About 40 Years

¶4

Omkar S/o Late Shri Sunda, Aged About 75 Years

¶5

Umrao S/o Bhanwra Khatik, Aged About 50 Years

¶6

Rameshwar S/o Late Shri Chotha, All Are Residence of Grampura, Tehsil Kotputli, Distt. Jaipur.

¶7

----Petitioners

¶8

Versus

¶9

Rajendra Singh S/o Amar Singh

¶10

Nanbai Bewa Amarsingh

¶11

Taj Kanwar Bewa Laxman Singh

¶12

Narendra Singh S/o Laxman Singh

¶13

Yogendra Singh S/o Laxman Singh

¶14

Sampat Singh S/o Gulab Singh

¶15

Chatar Kanwar Bewa Parishit Singh

¶16

Jai Singh S/o Shiv Singh, All Are by Caste Rajput, R/o Pragpura, Tehsil Kotputli, Distt. Jaipur.

¶17

Smt. Saroj Devi W/o Rohitashav by Caste Jat

¶18

Smt. Suman Devi W/o Suresh by Caste Jat

¶19

Pitram S/o Bhanwara Khatik (Died) Through L.R.S

¶20

12/1. Savitri Devi Bewa Pitram

¶21

12/2. Karn D/o Pitram

¶22

12/3. Manju D/o Pitram

¶23

12/4. Vishambhar S/o Pitram

¶24

Mahendra S/o Bhagota, All Are Resident of Grampura, Tehsil Kotputli, Distt. Jaipur.

¶25

Ramotar S/o Chota

¶26

Prakash S/o Chotha

¶27

(2 of 6)

¶28

[CW-753/2018]

¶29

Rohitash S/o Chotha 17. Omi S/o Chotha 18. Ram Niwas S/o Banwari Lal 19. Prakash S/o Banwari Lal 20. Sita D/o Banwari Lal 21. Vimla D/o Banwari Lal 22. Saroj D/o Banwari Lal 23. Smt. Phooli D/o Nathu 24. Smt. Dadki D/o Nathu 25. Smt. Shanti @ Santra D/o Nathu 26. Smt. Angoori Devi D/o Bhanwara 27. Samruddin 28. Nizamuddin 29. Nazruddin

¶30

Sarti D/o Sunda 31. Mustaka S/o Noora 32. Sayeed S/o Noora 33. Pappu S/o Noora 34. Fakroon Bewa Shabbir 35. Tayab S/o Shabbir 36. Hussain S/o Shabbir 37. Tahir S/o Shabbir 38. Anjum S/o Shabbir 39. Sitra D/o Shabbir 40. Salma D/o Shabbir 41. Tabbsum D/o Shabbir 42. Sannu D/o Shabbir

¶31

(3 of 6)

¶32

[CW-753/2018]

¶33

Firoza D/o Shabbir

¶34

Jarina D/o Noora

¶35

Mehraj Bano Bewa Raseed

¶36

Manohar Khan S/o Raseed

¶37

Sameer Khan S/o Raseed

¶38

Mangu Khan S/o Raseed

¶39

Reshma D/o Raseed

¶40

Samma D/o Raseed

¶41

Nusrat D/o Raseed

¶42

Manju D/o Raseed

¶43

Khatun Bewa Jamaal

¶44

Lallu Khan S/o Jamaal

¶45

Basir Khan S/o Jamaal

¶46

Mazid Khan S/o Jamaal

¶47

Sagir Khan S/o Jamaal

¶48

Jarila D/o Jamaal

¶49

Kajodi D/o Jamaal

¶50

Heela D/o Jamaal

¶51

Asha D/o Jamaal

¶52

Santara Bewa Ramotar

¶53

Praveen S/o Ramotar

¶54

Prakash S/o Ramotar

¶55

Saroj Devi D/o Ramotar

¶56

Ashok S/o Bhagota 67. Rajbala D/o Bhagota, All Resident of Pragpura, Tehsil Kotputli, Distt. Jaipur (Raj.)

¶57

Mahendra Singh S/o Amar Singh Rajput, R/o Pragpura, Tehsil Kotputli, Distt. Jaipur.

¶58

(4 of 6)

¶59

[CW-753/2018]

¶60

Smt. Munni Kanwar R/o Amar Singh W/o Mahaveer Singh Rajput, R/o Kaleheda, Tehsil Parbatsar, Distt. Nagaur. 70. Smt. Pushpa Kanwar D/o Amar Singh W/o Nansingh, by Caste Rajput, R/o Kaleheda, Tehsil Parbatsar, Distt. Nagaur.

¶61

Smt. Usha Kanwar D/o Amar Singh W/o Om Singh Rajput, R/o Kaleheda, Tehsil Parbatsar, Distt. Nagaur.

¶62

Smt. Suman Kanwar D/o Amar Singh W/o Virendra Singh, R/o Mayapur, Tehsil Parbatsar, Distt. Nagaur.

¶63

Smt. Susheel Kanwar D/o Amar Singh W/o Virendra Singh, R/o Mayapur, the Parbatsar, Distt. Nagaur.

¶64

Suman Kanwar D/o Laxman Singh W/o Mahendra Singh, R/o Lohagal Ajmer

¶65

Reena Kanwar D/o Shiv Singh W/o Dhyan Singh, by Caste Rajput, R/o Rawan Gate, Sunder Vihar, Jhotwara, Jaipur.

¶66

Devendra Singh S/o Laxman Singh

¶67

Ucchab Kanwar Bewa Janak Singh

¶68

Ravindra Singh S/o Janak Singh

¶69

Yatendra Singh S/o Janak Singh

¶70

Vishnu Kanwar D/o Janak Singh

¶71

Asha Kanwar D/o Janak Singh

¶72

Ucchav Kanwar Bewa Shiv Singh

¶73

Bhanwar Singh S/o Shiv Singh

¶74

Gajendra Singh S/o Shiv Singh

¶75

Himmat Singh S/o Shiv Singh, R/o Grampura, Tehsil Kotputli, Distt. Jaipur.

¶76

----Respondents

¶77

_____________________________________________________ For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vinod Kumar Sharma For Respondent(s) :

¶78

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.BHANDARI

Order

(5 of 6)

[CW-753/2018]

17/01/2018

By this writ petition, a challenge is made to the order dated 15^th December, 2017 passed by the Board of Revenue.

¶84

This case has chequered history. A suit was filed by the plaintiff-respondents. It was decreed by the court of Sub Divisional Officer on 3^rd October, 1988. The appeal was thereupon preferred before the Revenue Appellate Authority where an interim order was passed thus decree remained unexecutable. During pendency of the appeal, a settlement is alleged to have been produced before the SDO. It is despite the fact that no case was pending before the SDO. A copy of the settlement was produced even before the Board of Revenue in pending revision petition though appeal against the decree was pending before the Revenue Appellate Authority. If at all settlement was entered between the parties, it should have been produced before the Revenue Appellate Authority to seek decree in terms of settlement by quashing the decree of the SDO court dated 3^rd October, 1988.

¶85

In the meanwhile, pending appeal was dismissed in default on 8^th October, 2013. With dismissal of the appeal, the decree passed by the SDO became final as order of dismissal of the appeal was not challenged. The execution petition pursuant to the decree dated 3^rd October, 1988 was filed, however, orders were passed ignoring the fact that appeal was dismissed in default on 8^th October, 2013 thus decree is executable. The matter finally travelled to the Revenue Board in a revision petition. The impugned order has been passed thereupon finding decree to be executable, however, it is other than for the portion already sold in

¶86

(6 of 6)

¶87

[CW-753/2018]

¶88

between. It is taken to be a case of bonafide purchase.

¶89

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that when a settlement was made by the parties thus should have been governed by the aforesaid instead of decree of the SDO court dated 3^rd October, 1988.

¶90

I find no substance in the argument aforesaid for the reason that against the decree, when appeal was pending before the Revenue Appellate Authority, none appeared and, accordingly, it was dismissed for non-prosecution. The decree dated 3^rd October, 1988 thus became final and executable in the hands of the decree holder. The order was passed on the execution petition ignoring the aforesaid and has not been accepted by the Board of Revenue, rather, decree is made executable to the extent of property still remained unsold. Accordingly, there exists no reason to cause interference in the impugned order. The settlement between the parties was not produced before the appellate court to nullify the decree and to pass an order in terms of the settlement.

¶91

The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. The petitioner would be at liberty to pursue the case to save the appeal, if it is permissible.

¶92

FRBOHRA

Yogendra Singh and Ors. v. Rajendra Singh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yogendra Singh and Ors. v. Rajendra Singh and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vikas Nehra Vs State of Raj and Anr.

Farjeena Vs State of Rajasthan and Ors.

Aevraj @ Foru Vs State of Rajasthan through P P

Taufiq Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Ramavtar Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Sakawat@Mohammad Sakawt Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp