Back
[Citation : RLW 2003 RJ 186]
(Rajasthan High Court)
Tahal Singh Vs. B.O.R. & Ors. (Garg, J.)
HON'BLE SUNIL KUMAR GARG, J.
Tahal Singh
Versus
Board of Revenue & Ors.
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3587 of 1991, decided on 28th January, 2003
Both the courts have recorded a clear finding of fact that the disputed land measuring 10 bighas and 1 biswa was in the possession of respondents No.4 (Pahalwan Singh) and 5 (Avtar Singh) since long and merely because portion of disputed land was in the allotment of Tahal Singh (original petitioner) it would not make out a case for decreeing the suit in favour of Tahal Singh (original petitioner) under Section 183 of the Act of 1955 in as much as the possession of respondents No.4 (Pahalwan Singh) and 5 (Avtar Singh) could not be termed as that of trespassers. (Para 16)
(b) Constitution of India, Art. 227 & Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955, Sec. 183 — Powers of High Court — Held — High Court cannot interfere with the exercise of a discretionary power vested in the lower Courts or Tribunal unless its finding or order is clearly perverse or patently unreasonable. (Paras 13 to 15)
Petition dismissed.
The findings of facts recorded by the courts below are based on correct appreciation of law and facts. From perusing the findings recorded by the Courts below, it does not appear that there is patent irregularity or error of law apparent on the face of record and the findings recorded by the courts below do not require any interference by this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. (Para 15)
.
Note : It may be stated here that during pendency of writ petition, the petitioner Tahal Singh died and therefore, his legal representative Kalu Singh was brought on record.
(2). The facts as put forward by the petitioner are as under :
(i) That 27 bighas of land situated in Chak No. 1 FDM in square No. 80/336, Killa No. 24, 25, Square No. 80/337 Killa No. 3 to 6 and square No. 80/337 Killa No. 1-3, 7-25 was in the possession of Tahal Singh (original petitioner) on temporary cultivation basis from samvat year 2017 (year 1972) and this land was later on allotted to Tahal Singh (original petitioner) on permanent basis by the Assistant Commissioner, RCP, Rai Singhnagar camp Suratgarh vide allotment letter dtd. 19.12.83 (Annex. 1).
(ii) That out of 27 bighas of land, the respondents No.4 (Pahalwan Singh) and 5 (Avtar Singh) were interfering in the possession of the petitioner over the land situated in Square No. 80/377 Killa No. 7 and 8, measuring 2 bighas, Killa No. 13 to 19 measuring 7 bighas and Killa No. 20 measuring 10 biswas and Killa No. 22 measuring 10 biswas total measuring 10 bighas and 1 biswas. Tahal Singh (original petitioner) therefore, moved an application before the Dy. Collector, RCP now IGNP and Deputy Collector vide his order dtd. 2.3.84 ordered the SHO to take possession of the same.
(iii) Further case of the petitioner is that on 14.8.84, respondents No. 4 (Pahalwan Singh) and 5 (Avtar Singh) with the help of some other persons took forcible possession of above 10 bighas and 1 biswas of land situated in Chak No. 1 FDM from Tahal Singh (Original petitioner).
(iv) That further case of the petitioner is that in respect of above land measuring 10 bighas and 1 biswas, Tahal Singh (original petitioner) filed a suit on 25.8.84 (Annex. 2A) under Section 183 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1955) against the respondents No.4 (Pahalwan Singh) and 5 (Avtar Singh) in the Court of Assistant Collector, Suratgarh (respondent No. 3).
(v) That reply (Annex. 4) to the suit was filed by the respondent No.4 (Pahalwan Singh) and 5 (Avtar Singh) on 29.5.85. On behalf of Tahal Singh (original petitioner) Uda Ram, Halka Patwari was examined before the Assistant Collector, Suratgarh (respondent No.3). Copy of statement of Halka Patwari is marked as Annexc. 5.
(vi) That the Assistant Collector (respondent No. 3) vide his judgment dtd. 17.2.88 (Annex. 7) dismissed the suit filed by Tahal Singh.
(vii) That being aggrieved by the judgment dtd. 17.2.88 (Annex. 7) passed by the Assistant Collector, Suratgarh (respondent No.3), the deceased preferred an appeal before the Revenue Appellate Authority, Bikaner. However, on the applicable of respondents No.4 (Pahalwan Singh) and 5 (Avtar Singh) in the Board of Revenue, this appeal filed by the deceased was transferred to the Revenue Appellate Authority, Ajmer (respondent No.2).
(viii) That the Revenue Appellate Authority. Ajmer (respon
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
