JUDGMENT : The petitioner has come by way of this revision assailing the order dated 27th July 2012, whereby the Court of JMFC has rejected the application filed by the petitioner for rejecting the plaint of the respondent seeking declaration and injunction against the petitioner, with respect to the suit land, which is claimed by the respondent, is the property which ought to have been mentioned by the Revenue Authorities in the name of respondent/plaintiff. 2. After the settlement it has wrongly been given as survey no.317/1 belonging to defendant no.1 in the plaint. It is submitted that the petitioner claims to have purchased the property from the said defendant who infact had no right in the aforesaid property and was not competent to sell the property. The petitioner filed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 CPC on the strength of Section 257 (F) of the M.P.Land Revenue Code by submitting that since the Government of Madhya Pradesh was also made a party in the suit, the suit filed by the respondent was bad in law and was not liable to be proceeded with. 3. In view of the bar contained in Section 257 (F) of the Code, learned Court of JMFC has examined the aforesaid proposition in the impugned order by making the following observations:- XXX XXX XXX 4. Having examined the reasons given by the trial Court, the provisions contained under Section 257 of the Code, as well as the peculiar facts of this case, I am satisfied that the suit filed by the respondent which was basically for seeking injunction against the third party, who could not have claimed ownership of the property and could not have claimed a better title from the sellers with reference to the rights of the property of the plaintiff/respondent in the suit property, it cannot be said that the suit was not maintainable, prima facie more so when the respondent/plaintiff who has already instituted proceedings for correction of revenue records for correcting the record to the extent that instead of the name of first defendant in the suit, the name of the respondent/plaintiff be substituted. 5. With these observations the revision is disposed of. 6. Copy of this order be sent to the trial Court alongwith the records.