2013 Supreme(Raj) 1743
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Vineet Kothari, J.
Khema Ram - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan and others - Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 11035 of 2013.
Decided On : 6-09-2013
Advocates:
For the Petitioner:Moti Singh, Advocate.
Orders appointing a Receiver under Section 212 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 are appealable under Section 225(1) of the Act.
Headnote:
RECEIVER APPOINTMENT - RAJASTHAN TENANCY ACT, 1955 - SECTION 212, 225 - APPEALABILITY OF ORDER APPOINTING RECEIVER - INTERPRETATION OF SECTION 225(1) - AVAILABILITY OF ALTERNATIVE REMEDY.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner challenged the order of the S.D.O. appointing a Receiver on his land under Section 212 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955, claiming that the order was passed without giving him an opportunity to be heard.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the order appointing the Receiver was appealable under Section 225(1) of the Act, which provides for appeals from orders passed under Section 212. The Court also held that the order was a final order, as it disposed of the application for the appointment of a Receiver.
Issues: 1. Whether the order appointing the Receiver was appealable under Section 225(1) of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955? 2. Whether the order was a final order?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. Section 225(1) of the Act provides for appeals from orders passed under Section 212, which includes orders appointing a Receiver. 2. The order appointing the Receiver was a final order as it disposed of the application for the appointment of a Receiver.
Final Decision: The Court dismissed the writ petition, holding that the petitioner had an adequate and efficacious alternative remedy by way of appeal to the Revenue Appellate Authority.
JUDGMENT :
1. The petitioner has approached this Court by way of present writ petition aggrieved by order dated 14.08.2013 (Annex.8) passed by learned S.D.O., Nokha, on an application filed by the respondent No.3- Chetan Ram S/o Lakha Ram (real brother of the present petitioner) under Section 212 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955, (for short, hereinafter referred to as 'Act of 1955') for appointment of Receiver on the land in dispute of Khasra Nos. 391 and 392, situated at Village-Sinyala, Tehsil Nokha, District: Bikaner.
2. The dispute is between the two brothers and according to the plaint, there was division of said agricultural land by mutual agreement of 02.02.1983. But, in the suit filed by the respondent No.3/plaintiff, Chetan Ram S/o Lakha Ram, against the petitioner/defendant, Khema Ram S/o Lakha Ram, the plaintiff has claimed that the land of Khasra No. 391 measuring 3.17 Hectares be declared to be in the account of the plaintiff, whereas the land measuring 3.14 Hectares of Khasra No.392 may be declared in the account of the defendant/petitioner, Khema Ram.
3. Mr. Moti Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner/defendant submitted that the suit was registered by the learned revenue court below on 08.08.2013 and the next date was fixed on 05.09.2013 awaiting service of the summons on the defendant/petitioner, however, before 05.09.2013, on 14.08.2013, the case was taken up by the revenue court below i.e. the S.D.O., Nokha on the application filed by the plaintiff/respondent No.3, Chetan Ram under Section 212 (2) of the Act of 1955 for appointment of the Receiver and without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner/defendant, on wholly unfounded grounds, the learned S.D.O., Nokha, vide the impugned order dated 14.08.2013 appointed the Receiver for the land in question of Khasra No.391, of which the petitioner/defendant was in peaceful possession ever since the mutual agreement between the parties on 02.02.1983. Being aggrieved by the same, the defendant/petitioner has approached this Court by way of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
4. On the question of availability of the alternative remedy available to the petitioner by way of appeal under Section 225 of the Act of 1955, learned counsel for the petitioner/defendant urged that only final orders passed under Section 212 of the Act of 1955 are appeal able to the next higher authority under Section 225 of the Act of 1955 and since the present ad-interim order dated 14.08.2013 passed by the learned S.D.O. cannot be said to be final order passed on the application under Section 212 of the Act of 1955 as in the end of the said order itself, the next date was fixed on 05.09.2013, therefore, this order is not appeal able in his submission and thus there is no alternative remedy available to him as per provisions of the Act of 1955. He, therefore, submitted that the present writ petition is maintainable and he further urged that on merits the petitioner/defendant has good case since by ex-parte order before the next date fixed in the revenue suit, the learned court below appointed the Receiver on the land in question depriving the petitioner/defendant of his continued peaceful possession of the land in question.
5. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at some length, this Court is of the opinion that the order under challenged in the present writ petition is an appeal able order and an alternative remedy, efficacious and adequate, is available to the petitioner against the said order. It is found relevant to quote the Section 225 of the Act of 1955 hereunder for ready reference:-
"S. 225.Appeals from orders- (1) An appeal shall lie from the final order passed on an application of the nature specified in the Third Schedule and from such other orders as are mentioned in Section 212 of this Act and in Section 104 of the Code of Civil Procedure , 1908 (Central Act V. of 1908)
(i) to the Collector, if such order is passed by a
Click Here to Read the rest of this document
Back
