Seeking quashing of order dated 04.05.1998 in R.P. Case No. 4 of 1992-93, order dated 23.10.1998 in R.R. Appeal No. 42 of 1998-99 and order dated 22.03.2006 in S.A.R. Revision No. 8 of 1999, the present writ petition has been filed.

2. The brief facts narrated in the writ petition are that, the petitioner-company namely, Perfect Electric Concern (P) Ltd. was established in the year, 1960. The petitioner-company purchased a piece of land admeasuring 3.85 acres comprised in Khata No. 155 and 28 in Mauza-Bayanbil, P.S.Parsudih vide saledeed dated 04.08.1973 and amalgamated the same with its adjoining lands. It is stated that one Shri Gurucharan Singh Bhumij acquired a Pradhani right in Thana No. 1184, Mauza-Bayanbil and the said Gurucharan Singh Bhumij settled land admeasuring 12.87 acres in Plot Nos. 5, 6, 8 and 10 to a nontribal namely, one Shri Sunder Das on a rent of rupees two and one Anna by executing a settlement deed dated 29.06.1945. One Smt. Kuthru Kundaram purchased land comprised in thana No. 1184, Mouza-Bayanbil, Plot No. 8, Areaapproximately 7 Bigha 4 Katha vide registered saledeed dated 22.01.1954 for a valuable consideration. She also purchased about 1 Bigha 17 Katha of land comprised in the said Thana No. 1184 vide saledeed dated 16.07.1954 and about 0.42 acres of land directly from the landlordShri Gurucharan Singh Bhumij by registered saledeed dated 23.10.1954 and about 5 Bigha 16 Katha and 10 Dhur of land vide registered saledeed dated 19.02.1955 from Sunder Das. In this manner, the said Kuthru Kundaram acquired more than 13 Bighas of land. In the Revisional Survey Settlement of 1964, the aforesaid land is recorded as “Balat Dakhal” in the name of Smt. Kuthru Kundaram and in this manner she perfected her title. The land in question has been purchased from Smt. Kuthru Kundaram by one Smt. Sita Devi Khirwal vide registered saledeed dated 23.12.1965. The petitioner acquired about 3.85 acres of land from the said Smt. Sita Devi Khirwal through registered saledeed dated 04.08.1973. It further appears that on 19.12.1980, one Gomo Ho filed an application in the court of Subdivisional Magistrate, Dalbhum alleging that the aforesaid land belonged to him and he was paying rent to the State however, the opposite party namely, Smt. Kuthru Kundaram with the help of survey staff and Amin got her name recorded with respect to the “Balat Dakhal” land in Khata No. 28, Thana No. 1184 and thus, the opposite party fraudulently occupied the said land. The petitioner who at that time had come in possession of the land in question moved Patna High Court in C.W.J.C. No. 223 of 1984(R) challenging notice issued in the proceeding under Section 71A of the Chhotanagpur Tenancy Act, 1908 initiated on the application filed by said Gomo Ho. Vide order dated 28.01.1991, the said notice was quashed holding that proceeding under Section 71A of CNT Act was not maintainable. However, it was observed that dismissal of the writ petition would not be a bar for the said Gomo Ho for seeking relief, if available to him, before appropriate forum. The said Gomo Ho filed Title Suit No. 47 of 1991 which has been dismissed in default.

3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

4. Mr. Pandey Neeraj Rai, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that long before Section 46 was introduced in CNT Act, 1908 with effect from 05.01.1948, the land in question stood transferred in favour of a nontribal namely, Sunder Das vide Deed of Settlement dated 29.06.1945 and therefore, the subsequent transfer of the land in question would not be hit by the provision contained under Section 46 of the CNT Act, 1908. It is further submitted that the original owner of the land in question namely, Gomo Ho initiated a proceeding under Section 71A of CNT Act, 1908 and the notice issued in the said proceeding was quashed by Hon'ble Patna High Court and thus, the present proceeding initiated at the instance of the said Gomo Ho was barred by resjudi