Proceedings under Section 71A of the Chotanagpur Tenancy Act cannot be maintained after unreasonable delay, and principles of res judicata apply to prevent re-litigation of settled matters.

JUDGMENT :

DEEPAK ROSHAN, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The instant writ petition has been filed praying, inter alia, for quashing of the entire proceedings being SAR No. 52/2024-25, initiated by the Court of Special Regulation Officer, initiated under Section 71A of the Chotanagpur Tenancy Act, 1908 vide notice bearing number 340 dated 19.10.2024.

3. Mr. Prashant Pallav, assisted by Mr. Parth Jalan, learned counsels representing the petitioners submit that the land appertaining to Khata No. 31, Plot No. 28 (corresponding to MS Plot No. 1226) admeasuring an area of 1.41 acres in village-Siram (hereinafter referred to as the scheduled land) was in the continuous and peaceful possession of the Petitioners since 1946. The ancestor of the Petitioners namely Jiwal Lal, took permission from then Deputy Commissioner under the provisions of the Chotanagpur Tenancy Act, 1908 and purchased the land from the recorded raiyat (i.e. ancestors of Domba Oraon) by execution of a registered sale deed on 20.7.1960.

It has been submitted that soon thereafter a suit being Original Suit No. 109 of 1961 was filed by the legal heirs of Domba Oraon against their co-sharers i.e. the legal heirs of Cherbo Oraon along with the ancestor of the Petitioners. The Plaintiff of this suit have sought for the relief for partition of the suit property and further prayed that the compensation against acquisition of the land appertaining to Plot No. 26 and 27 be released in their favour. The suit was compromised and a decree was prepared in which the right, title and interest of the Petitioners’ ancestor over the scheduled land was recognized.

4. It has been further pleaded that the ancestor of Respondent No. 4, namely one Domba Oraon had filed a case under Section 71A of the Chotanagpur Tenancy Act, 1908 which was registered as SAR Case No. 132 of 1992-93. The same was dismissed on the ground of limitation and the said decision was affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the order passed in Civil Appeal No. 1057 of 2004 dated 31.8.2010.

He further submits that the Respondent No. 4 is a luxurious litigant and along with the impugned proceedings he is also pursuing another suit being Original Suit No. 495 of 2021, in which the same and similar reliefs have been sought.

5. In light of the above facts, it has been submitted that the instant proceedingsis not only hopelessly barred by limitation but also hit by the principles of res judicata. Further, it has been contented that the Respondent No. 4 has not approached the authorities with clean hands and have committed perjury by furnishing a false statement on affidavit wherein it has been stated that no other case has been filed by him with respect to the scheduled land and as such the impugned proceeding is fit to be quashed.

6. It has been submitted by Mr. Radha Krishna Gupta appearing for the Respondent no.4that the land appertaining to Plot No. 26 and 27 were possessed by him; however, the scheduled land was vacant and was fraudulently occupied by the Petitioners. It has been further submitted that he is unaware about the suit being OS Case No. 495 of 2021 as the same has not been filed by him; but the fact remains that the suit is being pursued by his father.

It has been pleaded that sale deed (the Court presumes that Respondent No. 4 is talking about the sale deed of 1960) is fraudulent and the Respondent No. 4 has applied for the certified copies of Title Suit No. 109 of 1961 to verify the facts.

7. In Para-10 of the counter-affidavit, Respondent No. 4 has laid down his case wherein he has stated that he is not aware about any OS case filed by his father. He has pleaded that the land was being cultivated by his ancestors till late 90s and thereafter the land was fraudulently acquired by the Petitioner. It has been further submitted that after the demise of Domba Oraon, the case was pursued by Akash Oraon (his brother) and as such he has no knowledge of the same. It has been additionally pleaded