Bapna, J.—This is an Ijlas-i-Khas appeal transferred to the High Court for disposal.

2. One Nathkaran obtained a decree under orders of the Musahib Ala of Marwar on the 22nd of September, 1901, for recovery of Rs. 22,387/8/-from one Rampratap, and in execution of that decree an Amin was appointed at first, and thereafter by an order of the Mahakma Khas, dated the 13th of September, 1904, the judgment-debtors one-fourth share in village Burakia, Tehsil Jodhpur, was directed to be handed over to the decree-holder. The decree-holder was granted an Ijara for Rs. 500/-, out of which Rs. 113/10/- was to be deposited in Baqiyat uptil Samwat, 1966, and the rest was to be appropriated by him. This Ijara was subsequently raised to Rs. 700/-by an order of the Mahakma Khas, dated the 23rd of January, 1909. The decree holder and his descendants remained in possession of the property thereafter. On the 28th of April, 1944, Mst. Lakshmi Bai, widow and legal representative of Rampratap, made an application that the decree-holder had been in possession since 1901, and must have recovered far in excess of the sum decreed, and that in any case the possession of the decree-holder having exceeded 30 years, the decree should be considered to have been paid off, and that the possession of the property should be restored to the petitioner, and the decree-holder be directed to repay the excess amount realized. Amar Singh and Ram Singh, grand-sons and legal representatives of Nathkaran, opposed the petition on the ground that on the 18th of February, 1908, an order was passed by the Mahakma Khas that half of the Ijara money was to be credited towards interest, and the rest towards the principal, and that, in any case, a large amount of the decree was still outstanding, and the decree-holder was entitled to retain possession untill his decree had been paid off. The District Judge held on the 8th of October, 2957, that under the Notification of the Government, dated the 30th of March, 1932, a mortgage or Ijara for more than 24 years was invalid, and by the end of that period the debt secured under the mortgage lease was to be deemed to have been discharged, and that, accordingly, in this case, as the decree-holder had admittedly enjoyed possession for more than 24 years, the decree-holder was not entitled to retain possession any longer. The District Judge declared that the decree should be deemed to have been fully satisfied, and directed restoration of possession to the petitioner, Mst. Lakshmi Bai.

3. Both the parties filed appeals, the judgment-debtor in so far as the claim for refund of excess amount realised by the decree-holder was not adjudicated upon, and the decree-holder on the ground that the Notification of 1932 was not applicable to the case. The learned Judges of the High Court of the Covenanting State of Jodhpur dismissed the decree-holders appeal in limine, but accepted the judgment-debtors appeal, and directed enquiry as to the amount realised by the decree-holder for a finding whether any excess amount had been realized by him. The decree-holder was granted special leave to appeal to Ijlas-i-Khas, and filed an appeal accordingly.

4. It was contended by the learned counsel for the appellant, in the first place, that the Government Notification of 30th March, 1932, was not applicable to the transactions entered into before the date of the Notification. The said Notification was published in the Marwar Gazettee, of 9th April, 1932, and is as under:—

"It has come to my notice that Ijaras or bhoglawas of land are sometimes executed with a stipulation whereby the lessee or mortgagee is empowered to retain in his possession the land leased or mortgaged beyond the period of 2\ years. Such stipulations defeat the provisions of Rule 6 of the Bhoglawa Rules of 1915, which reads as follows:—

All alienation by way of mortgage for a period exceeding 24 years is prohibited. After the period of 24 years, the mortgaged land shall revert to the mortgagor or

Click Here to Read the rest of this document