Arun Mishra, CJ. - (1.) IN the intra Court appeal, order dt. 27.05.2008 passed by the Single Bench has been questioned, whereby S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2838/2008 filed by the appellant/petitioner, questioning the legality of order dt. 16.11.2007 passed by Board of Revenue, Ajmer dismissing the second appeal against the judgment and decree dt. 06.07.2001 passed by the Revenue Appellate Authority, has been dismissed. The appellant -plaintiff, Dulichand filed a suit before Sub Divisional Officer, Sikar for correction of the entries and declaration of Khatedari rights on the basis that name of his father Gordhan was entered in the Jamabandi of Samwat Year 2011 -14 with respect to land measuring 4½ Bighas, therefore, he is Khatedar of the said land. New Khasra number of the said land is 755, admeasuring 1.2 Hectare, but the same has wrongly been recorded in the name of Narain son of Jodha. It was further mentioned that there was no person named Narain son of Jodha living in the same village. It was also submitted before Revenue Appellate Authority that Narain son of Jodha died, therefore, his name be deleted. His name was deleted in the course of the appeal before Revenue Appellate Authority. Appeal was dismissed. Board of Revenue has also dismissed second appeal.
(2.) THE case set up by the appellant before the Single Bench was that since in Jamabandi of Samwat Year 2015, name of father of the appellant was mentioned on 4½ Bighas, therefore, the appellant was entitled for grant of Khatedari rights. The Single Bench has opined that name of Gordhan was not entered in the Jamabandi of Samwat Year 2011 -14 and his name was mentioned in the Jamabandi of Samwat Year 2015 -18 and thereafter for subsequent years also, his name was not mentioned in the revenue papers, therefore, it was a case of stray entry, which was made in favour of Gordhan and the same has not been relied upon. How name of Gordhan came to be entered in the Jamabandi of Samwat Year 2015 -18 was not proved. There was no basis for the stray entry. It was further opined by the Single Bench that single entry in the Jamabandi without any corroborative fact of entries of earlier Jamabandi and Jamabandi of the subsequent years will not give any Khatedari rights in favour of the petitioner. Thus, the Single Bench vide order dt. 27.05.2008 has dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant. Consequently, the intra Court appeal has been preferred by the appellant.
(3.) WE have gone through the various orders and the material on record. Sub Divisional Officer, Sikar, Revenue Appellate Authority and Board of Revenue have recorded finding of fact that the appellant -plaintiff was not able to establish the fact of single entry in his favour. What was the basis of making said entry in his favour, when the name of Gordhan was not entered in earlier years Jamabandi as well as in Jamabandi of subsequent years. Board of Revenue has also not interfered in the finding of fact recorded by Sub Divisional Officer, Sikar and Revenue Appellate Authority, which is based on appreciation of the documentary evidence on record. We find that no case for interference is made out in the orders passed by Revenue Courts as well as by the Single Bench. Intra Court appeal is devoid of merits and the same is, hereby, dismissed. Stay application is also dismissed.;