// 1 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6475/2004 Ghasi S/o Shri Mangya and Another Versus The Board of Revenue, Ajmer Camp, Jaipur and Others Date of Order ::: 15.04.2008 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Narendra Kumar Jain Shri Bharat Saini, Counsel for petitioners Shri J.P. Goyal, Counsel for respondents #### By the Court:- Heard learned counsel for the parties. The plaintiff-petitioners filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction in respect of disputed land in the trial court, which was decreed ex-parte against the defendants. Thereafter the defendants filed an application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure for setting-aside the ex-parte decree in the trial court, which was dismissed. Being aggrieved with the same, the defendants preferred an appeal before the Revenue Appellate Authority, which was allowed, and the order passed by the trial court, rejecting their application, was set-aside and consequently the ex-parte decree was also set-aside. Thereafter the plaintiff-petitioner preferred a revision petition before the Revenue Board but without success. The said orders of the Revenue Board as well as the Revenue Appellate Authority have been challenged in this writ petition by the plaintiffs. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that // 2 // the trial court was justified in passing the ex-parte decree as the summons of the suit were served upon the defendants and the application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the CPC was filed after three years, therefore, the orders passed by the Revenue Appellate Authority and the Revenue Board, both, are liable to be set-aside by this Court. The learned counsel for the respondents contended that the summons of the suit were not served upon the defendants and the decree was wrongly passed ex-parte against them. It is further contended on their behalf that ex-parte decree was prima facie contrary to the provisions of Section 42-B of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act and there is a finding in this regard by the Revenue Board also, therefore, the ex-parte decree has rightly been set- aside by the Revenue Appellate Authority as well as the Revenue Board and in these circumstances there is no merit in this writ petition and the same is liable to be dismissed. I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties in the light of the judgments passed by all the three courts below and, after considering the same, I find that the judgments passed by the Revenue Appellate Authority as well as the Revenue Board are absolutely justified in the eyes of law and I do not find any ground to interfere with the same. There is no merit in this writ petition and the same is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs. (Narendra Kumar Jain) J. //Jaiman// // 3 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN S.B. Civil Misc. Stay Application No.5568/2004 In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6475/2004 Ghasi S/o Shri Mangya and Another Versus The Board of Revenue, Ajmer Camp, Jaipur and Others Date of Order ::: 15.04.2008 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Narendra Kumar Jain Shri Bharat Saini, Counsel for petitioners Shri J.P. Goyal, Counsel for respondents #### By the Court:- Consequent upon dismissal of the writ petition itself, the stay application, filed therewith, does not survive and the same is also dismissed. (Narendra Kumar Jain) J. //Jaiman//