Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2005 DIGILAW 693 (RAJ)

Ogad Nath v. Board of Revenue

2005-03-01

GOVIND MATHUR

body2005
Judgment Govind Mathur, J.-The instant writ petitions, being raised on same facts and on common question of law are heard together and the same are hereby decided by this common Judgment . 2. The case in brief is that Sh. Gulab (legal representatives of whom are on record as Respondents No.3/1 to 3/8) and Sh. Dhanna (respondent No.4) preferred suits under Sections 88, 188 & 92-A of Rajasthan Tenancy Act claiming khatedari over Khasra Nos. 780, 781, 782, 783 and 786 at Moza Dhundha Lambodi. In both the suits, applications under Section 212 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act were also filed by the plaintiffs. After hearing the parties the trial Court i.e., the Court of Sub-Divisional Officer, Sojat by the order dated 112.1980 issued temporary injunction in favour of the plaintiffs with regard to the land bearing Khasra Nos. 780 and 786. The trial Court vacated the interim order with regard to the land bearing Khasra Nos. 782 and 783. An order was passed with regard to the land bearing Khasra No. 781 appointing Nayab Tehsildar, Sojat as receiver. An order of attachment was also passed with regard to land bearing Khasra No. 781. 3. Being aggrieved by this order an appeal was preferred by the present petitioner-defendant Ogad Nath before Revenue Appellate Authority, Jodhpur. The Revenue Appellate Authority by its order dated 11.04.1986 accepted the appeal and set aside the order passed by the SDO, Sojat. The appellate authority while deciding the appeal held that there was no application for appointment of received, and, therefore, the trial Court travelled beyond the jurisdiction vested with it by appointing Nayab Tehsildar, Sojat as receiver. The plaintiffs being aggrieved by the order passed by the Revenue Appellate Authority preferred revision petitions under Section 230 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act before the Board of Revenue for Rajasthan Ajmer. The Board of Revenue by its Judgment dated 07.01.1994 accepted the revision petitions and set aside the order dated 11.04.1986 passed by the Revenue Appellate Authority, Jodhpur. In light of the order passed by the Board of Revenue, Ajmer dated 07.01.1994, the order passed by the SDO, Sojat dated 112.1980 stood restored. The petitioners being aggrieved by the Judgment dated 07.01.1994 passed by the Board of Revenue, Ajmer approached this Court by way of filing writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. 4. The petitioners being aggrieved by the Judgment dated 07.01.1994 passed by the Board of Revenue, Ajmer approached this Court by way of filing writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. 4. This Court while admitting the writ petition for hearing pleased to pass interim orders in favour of the petitioner in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.430/1994 and stayed operation of the order dated 07.01.1994. The writ petition came up for hearing before this Court on 21.02.2005 when the Counsel for the petitioner was directed by the Court to verify present position of the suits giving rise to the present dispute. It has been informed to the Court by Counsel for the parties that the suits are still pending for hearing before the Court of SDO, Sojat. Looking to all the facts and circumstances of the case, specially in view of the fact that these writ petitions are arising out of the interim orders and those too are non-operative in view of the interim directions given by this Court, it shall be appropriate to direct the SDO, Sojat to decide the suits in question which are Revenue Suit No.21/1995 (Old No.42/1978) and Revenue Suit No.122/1995 (Old No.2/1978) within a period of three months from the date the certified copy of this order is served upon him by the petitioner. The petitioner is directed to serve a copy of this order upon the respondent before 11.03.2005. The parties are directed to maintain status quo as existing till disposal of the suit by the SDO, Sojat under the directions made above. With these directions both the writ petitions are disposed of .