Rajasthan High CourtMohd.Rais vs Abdul Shaqoor And Ors on 23 January, 2013Author:Bela M. TrivediBench:Bela M. TrivediIn the High Court of Judicature For Rajasthan 
At Jaipur Bench Jaipur
S.B. Civil Revision Petition No.217/2007
Mohammed Rais Versus Abdul Shaqoor & Ors.
Date of Order  ::::  23.01.2013
Hon'ble Ms. Justice Bela M. Trivedi

Mr. M.M. Ranjan Senior Advocate with
Mr. Ribhu Dutt, for petitioner.

Order
By the Court:-1.	The present revision petition has been filed by the petitioner-defendant underSection 115of C.P.C. challenging the order dated 09.10.2007 passed by the  Civil Judge (Sr.Div.) Nasirabad (hereinafter referred to as the civil court) in Civil Suit No.19/2002, whereby the civil court has dismissed the application of the petitioner filed underOrder VII Rule 11 of CPC.2.	At the outset, it is required to be stated that though the order under challenge is dated 09.10.2007, even the notices have not been issued to the respondents till this date. It also appears that the revision petition was dismissed for default and thereafter restored as per the order dated 13.08.2010.3.	So far as the merits of the case are concerned, it appears that the respondents No.1 to 11 had filed the suit against the petitioner and other respondents seeking permanent injunction in respect of the suit property. In the said suit the defendant-petitioner had filed the application under Order VII Rule 11 on the ground that the suit was filed without issuing notices required underSection 273of the Cantonment Act 1924 and therefore was not maintainable. The said application has been rejected by the trial court vide the impugned order.4.	The learned counsel Mr. M.M. Ranjan Senior Advocate for the petitioner submits that the trial court has committed an error in mis-appreciating the provisions contained inSection 273of the Cantonment Act. However, the Court does not find any substance in the said submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The trial court after appreciating the provisions contained inSection 273of the Cantonment Act has dismissed the application, which order does not suffer from any illegality or infirmity. The petition being devoid of merits deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed.(Bela M. Trivedi), J.R.Vaishnav43.

Certificate:All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed.Ramesh Vaishnav Jr.P.A.