The Rajasthan High Court dismissed a civil revision petition and execution first appeal challenging the demarcation of disputed land. The court held that the Tehsildar conducted the survey in compliance with the High Court order without objection at the time, rendering the appeals devoid of merit.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
[2024:RJ-JP:7461]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 130/2008
----Petitioners
Versus
(2 of 6)
[2024:RJ-JP:7461]
[CR-130/2008]
Shiv Charan R/o Katra, Nadbai, District Bharatpur.
----Respondents
Connected With
S.B. Execution First Appeal No. 4/2011
1/1. Smt. Omwati Jain Wife of Late Khem Chand,
½ Mukesh Jain son of Late Khem Chand,
¼ Harish Jain son of Late Khem Chand,
All resident of Katra Nadbai, Tehsil Nadbai, District Bharatpur.
All resident of Katra Nadbai, Tehsil Nadbai, District Bharatpur.
----Petitioners
Versus
(3 of 6)
[2024:RJ-JP:7461]
[CR-130/2008]
Both R/o Nadbai, Tehsil Nadbai, District Bharatpur.
----Respondents
| For Petitioner(s) | : | Mr. L. L. Gupta, Adv. in S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 130/2008 Mr. Nitin Jain, Adv. in S.B. Execution First Appeal No. 4/2011 |
|---|---|---|
| For Respondent(s) | : | Ms. Anita Aggarwal, Adv. with Mr. Laxmi Kant, Adv., Mr. Anubhav |
| Agarwal, Adv. & Mr. Vibhanshu | ||
| Sharma, Adv. in S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 130/2008 |
||
| Mr. L. L. Gupta, Adv. in S.B. Execution First Appeal No. 4/2011 |
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA
Judgment
DATE OF JUDGMENT
14/02/2024
Both revision petition and execution first appeal have arisen out of the same order dated 04.09.2008 passed by District Judge, Bharatpur in Civil Misc. Case No.10/77, hence, the arguments have been heard and they are being decided together.
S.B. Civil Revision Petition No. 130/2008 – Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Kishan Gopal filed a petition for declaration of insolvent. The said petition was decided vide order dated 16.11.1963 and he was declared insolvent. The respondent No.7-Onkar Nath was appointed as receiver, who attached the land bearing Khasra No.2381/972 measuring 8 Biswas situated in town Nadbai alongwith other property which was put to auction. The petitioner-auction purchaser deposited 1/4th amount of auction on 12.01.75. The respondent Nos.1 to 5 filed separate
[2024:RJ-JP:7461]
[CR-130/2008]
(4 of 6)
objections/applications against the auction of the said property. The said objections were decided by the learned Additional District Judge No.1, Bharatpur vide judgment dated 06.07.93 which were dismissed and they preferred Civil Miscellaneous Appeals before this Court, which were disposed of by a common order dated 11.02.2008 directing the District Judge, Bharatpur to send a requisition to the Collector to appoint the Tehsildar alongwith his subordinates to carry out the survey on the ground of Khasra No.2381/972 situated in town, Nadbai.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Tehsildar on 16.06.2008 inspected and proceeded with the survey proceedings in the presence of officials and submitted a report on 17.06.2008. The petitioner being dissatisfied with the report submitted his objection on 21.05.2008 that Tehsildar has shown the land of the disputed Khasra number in the land of the railway track and some part of the land have been occupied by raising the residential constructions. So, survey was not properly conducted but learned District Judge wrongly dismissed the objections filed by the petitioner. So, order dated 04.09.2008 of the District Judge, Bharatpur be set aside and Tehsildar, Nadbai be directed to submit the fresh report after demarcation of the land.
S.B. Execution First Appeal No. 4/2011 – Learned counsel for
the appellants submits that Tehsildar had not surveyed the disputed property as per the order of this Court dated 11.02.2008, it was directed to demarcate the land on the basis of revenue record of 1974 and revenue map but the Tehsildar had not demarcated the land as per the revenue record of 1974 because
[2024:RJ-JP:7461]
[CR-130/2008]
(5 of 6)
records were not available in the file. Learned counsel for the appellants also submits that the Tehsildar, Nadbai flouted the order of this Court and demarcated the land as per the site-plan produced by the Krishan Gopal. The Tehsildar had included the land of the appellants in the survey report but learned District Judge wrongly dismissed the objections filed by the appellants under Order 21 Rule 97/101 CPC. So, order of the trial court be set aside and matter be remanded back for fresh demarcation.
Learned counsel for the respondents has opposed the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the appellants and submitted that the Tehsildar, Nadbai rightly demarcated the land in the presence of the Revenue Officials. No objection was raised at the time of the inspection. So, learned District Judge rightly dismissed the objection filed by the petitioners as well as appellants. So, the Revision Petition as well as the Civil Execution First Appeal be dismissed.
I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the respondents.
This Court vide order dated 11.02.2008 ordered District Judge, Bharatpur to appoint the Tehsildar for demarcation of the land of Khasra No.2381/972 situated at town Nadbai. In compliance of order of this Court, Tehsilder along with Revenue Officials demarcated the land of Khasra No.2381/972. None objected at that time. So, in my considered opinion, learned District Judge rightly dismissed the objection raised by the petitioners as well as appellants. So, Revision Petition as well as
(6 of 6)
[2024:RJ-JP:7461]
[CR-130/2008]
Execution First Appeal being devoid of merit, are liable to be dismissed, which stand dismissed accordingly.
Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) dismissed.
(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J
Jatin /AVG/4-5
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the demarcation of the disputed land conducted by the Tehsildar in compliance of the High Court order should be set aside due to lack of objection at the time.
Whether the objection raised by the petitioners and appellants against the survey report has merit after the fact.
Deendayal
Puran Chand Gupta
Narendra Singh Dhaddha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
