Remanded

Birbal Nath v. Kushal Nath and Ors.

Rajasthan HC22 Nov 2023CR/5/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Rajasthan High Court disposed of a civil revision petition filed against the rejection of an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC. The Court directed the Trial Court to decide the suit within six months without prejudice to observations in the impugned order and stayed a stay petition.

What did the court decide?

The learned Trial Court directed to decide the suit within six months not being prejudiced by the observations in the impugned order. Stay petition also disposed of.

Birbal Nath Vs Kushal Nath and Ors. — Rajasthan HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

¶1

[2023:RJ-JD:40233]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 5/2018

¶4

Birbal Nath S/o Gopal Nath, Jasnathji Mandir, Tehsil Katriyasa, District Bikaner.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

Kushal Nath S/o Late Shri Govindnath, Resident Of Village Katriyasar, Tehsil And District Bikaner.

¶8

Kumnath S/o Late Shri Rawat Nath, Resident Of Village Katriyasar, Tehsil And District Bikaner.

¶9

Nanu Nath S/o Late Shri Nanak Nath, Resident Of Village Katriyasar, Tehsil And District Bikaner.

¶10

State Of Rajasthan Through District Collector, Bikaner.

¶11

Tehsildar Revenue, Bikaner.

¶12

----Respondents

¶13

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Devesh A Purohit For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vishal Sharma

¶14

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN GOPAL VYAS Judgment

¶15

22/11/2023

¶16

The present civil revision petition has been filed under Section 115 CPC against the order dated 13.12.2017 passed by learned Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate No. 8, Bikaner (hereinafter referred to as the learned Trial Court) in Civil Original Suit No. 405/2015 vide which the application filed by the petitioner-defendant under Order 7, Rule 11 read with Section 151 of CPC was rejected.

¶17

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Trial Court has erred in law as well as facts in dismissing the application under Order 7, Rule 11 read with Section 151 CPC. It

[2023:RJ-JD:40233]

[CR-5/2018]

(2 of 2)

is further submitted that the land in question vests in a public trust which is registered under the Rajasthan Public Trusts Act and therefore, the remedy lies under the said Act. Thus, the present suit is barred by law as the learned Trial Court lacks jurisdiction to decide the case. It is therefore prayed that the present revision petition may be allowed and the order dated 13.12.2017 be quashed and set aside.

¶22

Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the order passed by the learned Trial court is well reasoned and calls for no interference.

¶23

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. From a perusal of material available on record, it can be ascertained that at present, the suit is at the stage of defendant’s evidence. Furthermore, the objections that have been raised in the present revision petition are the issues which are to be decided by the learned Trial Court.

¶24

Therefore, the present revision petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned Trial Court to decide the suit itself within a period of six months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order without being prejudiced by the observations made in the impugned order dated 13.12.2017.

¶25

Stay petition also stands disposed of.

¶26

(MADAN GOPAL VYAS),J

¶27

113-CPG/-

Birbal Nath v. Kushal Nath and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Birbal Nath v. Kushal Nath and Ors.

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

Khadim and Ors. Vs Lrs of Ramchandra

Rohini @ Rinki Sharma Vs Rajesh Kumar

Neha Vs Madhur Gupta

Mamta Vs Naveen Kumar

Surji and Anr. Vs Bhanwar Singh and Anr.

Sohan Singh Vs Girdawari and Ors.