Revenue authorities under the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, 1959, presiding over partition matters, lack jurisdiction to execute civil court decrees or order the payment of mesne profits, as such powers fall exclusively within the domain of the competent civil executing court.

1. Present petition is directed against the order dated 27.05.2021 i.e. ANNEXURE-P/1, by which, the Board of Revenue has dismissed the revision filed by Late Bhukan Singh (Since Deceased) and affirmed the order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Durg Division dated 07.11.2016.

2. Following reliefs have been prayed by way of this petition:-

“10.1. That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call the entire records pertaining to case of the petitioner.

10.2. That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned order dated 27.05.2021 passed by the Board of Revenue, Bilaspur, and Circuit Bench Raipur (C.G.) (Annexure-P/1).

10.3. That any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that, initially, respondent No.1, Kaushilya Bai, filed a civil suit for declaration, partition and possession before the Civil Judge Class-II, Bemetara, which was decreed on 23.07.1984 granting her 1/6th share in the suit land, and the said decree was ultimately affirmed by the Hon’ble High Court on 07.09.2011. Thereafter, respondent No.1 initiated partition proceedings under Section 178 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code before the Tehsildar, who, after directing preparation of Fard Batwara and considering the same, passed a final order dated 07.03.2014 directing partition and correction of land records. Aggrieved, the petitioner’s father preferred an appeal before the Sub-Divisional Officer, Bemetara, raising objections including an alleged compromise between respondent No.1 and other respondents, but the appeal was dismissed on 22.01.2015 affirming the Tehsildar’s order. A further appeal before the Additional Commissioner, Durg Division was also dismissed on 07.11.2016 on the ground of lack of evidence regarding the alleged transactions. Subsequently, a revision was filed before the Board of Revenue wherein during pendency certain respondents filed no-objection and respondent No.1 placed reliance on a subsequent judgment and decree dated 28.11.2017 passed by the District Judge, Bemetara granting mesne profits in her favour. Ultimately, by impugned order dated 27.05.2021, the Board of Revenue, allegedly exceeding its jurisdiction, directed the petitioner and other respondents to pay Rs.4,27,500/- as mesne profits, ordered delivery of possession of 1/6th share to respondent No.1, and affirmed the orders of the authorities below, giving rise to the present petition.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order is wholly illegal, without jurisdiction and liable to be set aside. It is contended that the respondent No. 9/Board of Revenue has clearly exceeded the scope of its revisional jurisdiction by granting reliefs which were neither prayed for nor permissible in law. It is submitted that the original proceedings arose out of a case under Section 178 of the Chhattisgarh Land Revenue Code, which is confined only to partition of holdings. However, the Board of Revenue, while exercising revisional powers, has travelled beyond the scope of such proceedings by directing grant of mesne profits and further directing payment of a decretal amount of ₹4,27,500/-, which is wholly impermissible. It is contended that revenue authorities do not have the jurisdiction to grant mesne profits or to direct execution or satisfaction of a civil Court decree, as such powers vest exclusively with the competent civil Court executing the decree. Learned counsel further submits that while the order of partition passed by the Tehsildar, as affirmed