The Revenue Officer has jurisdiction to allow the legal representatives of the deceased tenant to make deposit of the compensation amount, if the tenant had remitted the amount by money order which was refused by the plaintiff.

JUDGMENT :

G.B. Patnaik, J. - Plaintiff is the appellant against a reversing judgment in a suit for declaration that the orders passed by the revenue officers in 'the O.L.R. proceedings are without jurisdiction, null and void and for permanent injunction against the defendants restraining them from entering upon the suit lands.

2. According to the plaintiff, one Iswar Behera, the recorded sikkimi tenant with respect to the suit lands filed an application, to be declared as a raiyat under sub-section (5) of Section 4 of the Orissa Land Reforms Act (here in after referred to as the 'Act') which was registered as O. L. R. Case No. 260 of 1967, The Revenue Officer in the said proceeding passed an order in favour of the applicant Iswar Behera on 24. 7. 1969 and the said order was confirmed in appeal by the Sub-Divisional Officer in O. L. R. Appeal No. 50 of 1971 by order dated 19. 5. 1971. The Revenue Officer had directed to pay the compensation amount to the tune of Rs. 542.90 paise within one year from the date of the order, but the said amount not having been paid within the stipulated period and said Iswar Behera having died, the plaintiff took forcible possession Of the land and continued to be in possession of the same on his own right. Subsequent to filing of the suit, on the application of the legal representatives of deceased Iswar Behera, the Revenue Officer having permitted to deposit the compensation amount by order dated 18. 12. 1973 and the said order having been confirmed in appeal by the Sub-Divisional Officer in O. L. R. Appeal No, 9 of 1974, the plaint was amended with the prayer that the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer in O. L. R. Appeal No. 9 of 1974 as also the order of the Revenue Officer dated 18. 12. 1973 be declared as null and void,

3. The defendants in their written statement challenged the maintainability of the suit and also contended that the amount of compensation had been remitted by late Iswar Behera on 9. 3.1969 by money order which was refused by the plaintiff and on the death of Iswar, his legal representatives, that is to say, the present defendants, were entitled to pay the compensation amount and that the orders of the revenue officers could not, therefore, be said to be null and void.

4. Thus, the admitted facts are that late Iswar Behera was the recorded sikkimi tenant of the suit lands measuring Ac. 1. 500 decs, in village Matiapoda, P. S, Tangi, District-Puri belonging to the plaintiff. The said Iswar Behera filed an application under sub-section (5) of Section 4 of the Act which was numbered as O. L. R. Case No. 260 of 1967 and the Revenue Officer, Banpur, by his order dated 24-7-1969 declared said Iswar Behera to be a raiyat in respect of the lands and determined the compensation in respect of the lands at Rs. 542. 90 paise to be paid to the plaintiff within one year, from the date of the order in accordance with sub-section (6) and (7) of Section 4 of the Act. This order of the Revenue Officer was challenged by the plaintiff before the Sub-Divisional Officer in O. L. R. Appeal No. 50 of 1971 and the learned Sub-Divisional Officer confirmed the order of the Revenue Officer by his order dated 19. 5.1971. Iswar Behera died in August, 1973. After his death, On an application by his legal representatives (present defendants), the Revenue Officer ordered that the amount be deposited, by order dated 18. 12. 1973 and accordingly the amount was so deposited. This order of the Revenue Officer was also confirmed in appeal by the Sub-Divisional Officer in O. L R. Appeal No. 9 of 1974.

5. On these pleadings, the learned Munsif came to hold that the compensation amount not having been paid within the period of one year of the date of the order, the order dated 24. 7. 1969 stood automatically nullified and the lands in question reverted back to the owner, namely the plaintiff, and in that view of the matter, the order of the Revenue Officer directing deposit of the compensation amount on 18. 12. 1973 w