Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, MUNNURI LAXMAN, JJ.
Nimmba Ram S/o Purkharam – Appellant
Versus
Premaram S/o Sh. Karnaram – Respondent
ORDER :
1. Heard.
2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 31.07.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby the writ petition filed by the appellants has been dismissed, affirming the order passed by the Board of Revenue dismissing the review as also the revisional order arising out of an order passed in the appeal, in the matter of an order passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer in purported exercise of powers under Section 251-A of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act of1955’).
3. Learned counsel for the appellants has made two-fold submissions. The first submission of learned counsel for the appellants is that in the present case, as the application filed by the respondents reads as it is, it was an application based on an allegation that the easementary right on an existing way has been disturbed and the text and tenor of the application was merely to restore the existing easementary right, therefore, such prayer could be examined only by the Tehsildar in proceedings drawn under Section 251 of the Act of 1955. According to learned counsel for the appellants, provisions under Section 251-A of the Act of 1955 would be attracted only in th
The court clarified that applications for restoring existing easementary rights fall under Section 251, while those for opening new ways fall under Section 251-A of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955.
The legal point established is that the right to a way arising out of absolute necessity under Section 251-A of the Act should be maintained.
The Tehsildar exceeded jurisdiction by acting before the Gram Panchayat's decision, necessitating civil suits for disputed easement claims rather than summary proceedings.
The court emphasized the necessity of following procedural requirements under Rule 69 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955, for eviction orders, highlighting the illegality of non-compliance.
Section 251 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955, applies to obstructions of rights of way, allowing for jurisdictional action by the Tehsildar regardless of whether the way is public or private.
The court emphasized the importance of providing the shortest or nearest route as per the law and highlighted the necessity of impleading relevant parties in cases involving way for khatedar tenants.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of Section 22 of the Indian Easements Act, 1882 and its influence on the court's decision regarding the existence and use of ....
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
