1 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.10509/2009 Bhura Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. DATE OF ORDER : 9.7.2010 HON'BLE MR. GOVIND MATHUR, J. Mr. R.S. Choudhary, for the petitioner. This petition for writ is preferred to assail validity, correctness and propriety of the judgment and decree dated 28.10.2009 (Annex.-15) passed by the learned Board of Revenue, Rajasthan, Ajmer in Appeal no.956/2007 (Bhura Ram Vs. Jora Ram and Anr.). The factual matrix necessary to be noticed is that respondent Jora Ram preferred a suit for partition before the court of learned Assistant Collector (H.Q.), Nagaur seeking partition of the land identified as Khasara No.1520. Learned Assistant Collector decreed the suit by the judgment dated 26.12.2006 gave a definite finding of fact that the land in dispute measuring 64.9 Bighas was purchased in the name of Hardas Ram by Chagna Ram father of the plaintiff, being a property of joint family it was required to be partitioned among all the 2 descendants of Chagna Ram. Being aggrieved by the same, an appeal was preferred by the defendant-petitioner before the learned Revenue Appellate Authority, Nagaur and that too came to be rejected vide judgment dated 9.2.2007. Learned Revenue Appellate Authority after considering the entire evidence available on record affirmed the finding given by the trial court. A second appeal then was preferred by the present petitioner before the Board of Revenue, Rajasthan, Ajmer and the Board of Revenue also found that the agriculture land in dispute was purchased in the name of Hardas Ram from Smt. Meera but was a property of a joint family. A specific finding is given that the land in question is not a self earned property of Hardas Ram, father of the present petitioner. The arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner that partition of certain other property was made in the year 1964, at that time, no objection was raised by the respondent – plaintiff regarding the present property and as such the property in question is nothing but self-earned property of Hardas Ram. As a matter of fact, the findings given by the courts below are based on sound appreciation of evidence and also on basis of revenue records wherein name of Chhagna Ram, father of the plaintiff and grand father of the present petitioner is entered as a tenant. The concurrent findings given by the trial 3 court, Revenue Appellate Authority and Board of Revenue are pure findings of fact and those are not required to be interfered by this Court while exercising the power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In view of whatever said above, the petition for writ is dismissed. (GOVIND MATHUR)J. RM/