Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2007 DIGILAW 82 (RAJ)

Kan Singh v. State of Raj.

2007-01-11

SHIV KUMAR SHARMA

body2007
Honble SHARMA, J.—Since common questions of law and facts are involved in the instant appeals, we propose to decide them by a common order. 2. In Appeal No. 809/1994, order July 22, 1992 of the learned Single Judge is under challenge whereby the writ petition filed by the respondent No.1, Kan Singh, was allowed at the back of the appellants. It is contended by the appellants that they are poor farmers having cultivatory possession on the land bearing Khasra No. 860/1192, which is half of the land belonging to the respondent No.1, Kan Singh, and the appellants had purchased the said land by way of a registered sale-deed dated July 18, 1972. Division of the land of the respondent No.1, Kan Singh, was made and the names of the appellants had already been entered in the revenue records. Kan Singh was a land holder of land comprising of 57 Bighas 2 Biswas out of Khasra No. 860 and half of the land had been ordered to be taken by the State Government as out of the ceiling limits. The matter went upto the Board of Revenue. Thereafter, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 209/1977 was filed by Kan Singh and the same was dismissed on May 15, 1986. The appellants were parties in the said writ petition. Against the order of the learned Single Judge, Kan Singh preferred the instant appeal bearing No. 339/1986 and in the said appeal, the appellants have been impleaded as respondent No. 5 to 8. 3. It appears from the order-sheet drawn in the instant Appeal No. 809/1994 that since the appellants were not party before the learned Single Judge, they have sought permission to file the instant special appeal and after granting the permission, the appeal was admitted on August, 9, 1995. 4. We have heard the rival submissions of both the parties and scanned the material on record. 5. We notice that the authorised officer issued the draft order under Section 12 of the New Ceiling act on April 30, 1975. Objections were submitted by Kan Singh on May 29, 1975. It was mentioned therein that in the year 1972, the registered sale-deed was executed in favour of Bhola, Ramhet, Ram Swaroop and Nathu. These persons were cultivating the land of Karan Singh. Ram Swaroop was examined as witnesses and he stated that he used to cultivate the land and was a landless person. It was mentioned therein that in the year 1972, the registered sale-deed was executed in favour of Bhola, Ramhet, Ram Swaroop and Nathu. These persons were cultivating the land of Karan Singh. Ram Swaroop was examined as witnesses and he stated that he used to cultivate the land and was a landless person. 6. On a careful scrutiny of these impugned judgments, we are of the view that in holding the transaction of sale as mala fide, the courts below have committed illegality in dispossessing the poor farmers from the land. 7. For the reasons mentioned above, we allow both the appeals and set aside the impugned orders of learned Single Judge, Board of Revenue, Collector, S.D.O. and Tehsildar, Sikrai, District Dausa. We remit the case to the S.D.O., Dausa to decide the matter afresh in view of the notification issued by the State Government on July 29, 2001. The parties are directed to appear before the S.D.O, Dausa on February 12, 2007. The S.D.O., Dausa shall decide the mater within three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this judgment. Till the matter is decided, the parties shall maintain the status quo in regard to the land in dispute. There shall be no order as to cost.