Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2008 DIGILAW 1392 (RAJ)

Puri Kanwar v. State of Rajasthan

2008-05-16

KAMAL NAYAN SHRIMAL

body2008
Jheky] lnL;-&;g fuxjkuh vUrxZr fu;e 23¼2½ jktLFkku mifuos'ku bafnjk xka/kh ugj ifj;kstuk {ks= esa ljdkjh Hkwfe dk vkoUVu rFkk foØ;½ fu;e] 1975 ¼ftls rRi'pkr~ ^fu;e 1975* dgk tkosxk½ fo:) fu.kZ; vk;qDr mifuos'ku] chdkusj fnukad 22-5-2007 ds izLrqr dh xbZ gSA 2- la{ksi esa izdj.k ds rF; bl izdkj gSa fd izkfFkZ;k Jherh iqjh daoj iRuh Jh ck?kflag jktiwr }kjk ^vf/kfu;e 1975* ds rgr pd ua- 4 vkj-th-,e- ds eqjCck ua- 192@44 ds fo'ks"k vkoUVu gsrq vkosnu i= mik;qDr mifuos'ku ,oa vkoUVu vf/kdkjh] tSlyesj ds le{k izLrqr fd;k vkSj lkFk esa izkfFkZ;k us 500@& :- dk fu/kkZfjr 'kqYd Hkh tek djok;kA ijUrq mik;qDr mifuos'ku ,oa vkoUVu vf/kdkjh] tSlyesj us izkfFkZ;k dk izkFkZuk i= muds vkns'k fnukad 25-11-2006 }kjk bl vk/kkj ij fujLr dj fn;k fd izkfFkZ;k Hkwfeghu ugha gS] D;ksafd Lo;a ds uke ij 25 ch?kk pd ua- 4 vkj-th-,e- ds eqjCck ua- 192@44 esa vkoafVr gSA o"kZ 1988 ds ckn dh oksVj&fyLV ugha gS] jk'kudkMZ dh izekf.kr izfrfyfi ugha gS] ln~Hkkoh dk'rdkj dk izek.k&i= lqLi"V ugha gSA mik;qDr mifuos'ku ,oa vkoUVu vf/kdkjh] tSlyesj us muds vkns'k fnukad 3-2-2007 }kjk mifuos'ku rglhy jkex<+ ua- 2 ds lh,Mh pØ 4 vkj-th-,e- eqjCck ua- 192@44 dh 245 ch?kk Hkwfe fo'ks"k vkoUVu ds rgr fojsUnzflag iq= nyirflag jktiwr dks vkoafVr dj nhA mDr vkoUVu ds rgr fojsUnzflag us 20 izfr'kr jkf'k fnukad 3-2-2007 tek djok nhA vkns'k fnukad 25-11-2006 ls O;fFkr gksdj izkfFkZ;k Jherh iqjh daoj us vihy la- 274@2007 vfrfjDr vk;qDr mifuos'ku ,oa jktLo vihy izkf/kdkjh] tSlyesj ds le{k izLrqr dh vkSj fuosnu fd;k fd vihy Lohdkj dj pd 4 vkjth,e eqjCck ua- 192@44 rk- 25 dk vkoaVu fojsUnzflag ds i{k esa fd;k x;k gS] dks fujLr dj iqu% lquokbZ djus dk vkns'k ikfjr fd;k tkos o mDr Hkwfe dk vkoUVu izkfFkZ;k dks fd;k tk;sA vihy ds lkFk izkfFkZ;k us ifjlhek vf/kfu;e] 1963 dh /kkjk 5 dk izkFkZuk i= Hkh izLrqr fd;kA i{kdkjksa dks lquus ds i'pkr~ vfrfjDr vk;qDr] mifuos'ku ,oa jktLo vihy izkf/kdkjh] tSlyesj us muds fu.kZ; fnukad 25-5-2007 }kjk izkfFkZ;k dk ifjlhek vf/kfu;e] 1963 dh /kkjk 5 dk izkFkZuk i= Lohdkj dj] foyEc dks {kek dj] vihy dks vUnj ifjlhek ekudj] xq.kkxq.k ds vk/kkj ij izkfFkZ;k dh vihy dks vLohdkj dj fn;kA mDr fu.kZ; ls O;fFkr gksdj izkfFkZ;k us iz'uxr fuxjkuh jktLo e.My jktLFkku] vtesj esa izLrqr dhA 3- i{kdkjksa ds fo}ku vf/koDrkx.k dks lquk x;k o muds }kjk izLrqr rdksZ ij euu fd;k x;kA 4- vfrfjDr vk;qDr mifuos'ku ,oa jktLo vihy vf/kdkjh] tSlyesj us i;kZIr dkj.k ekurs gq, vihykFkhZ dh vihy dks foyEc {kek dj vUnj fe;kn ekuk gSA ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us i;kZIr gsrqd ds lEcU/k esa dgk gS fd bldk mnkj vFkZ yxkuk pkfg;sA 'kdqUryk nsoh tSu cuke dqUry dqekjh ,.M vnlZ ,-vkbZ-vkj- 1969 ,l-lh- 575 = RLW 1999(1) SC 107 esa mPpre U;k;ky; us ;g crk;k gS fd%& "The words "sufficient cause" receiving a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice." ifjlhek fu;eksa dk vfHkizk; ;g gS fd os i{kdkjksa ds vf/kdkjksa dks u"V ugha djsaA os ;g ns[kus ds fy;s vfHkizsfjr gSa fd i{kdkj foyEcdkjh pkyksa dk lgkjk ugha ys vfirq 'kh?kzrk ls viuk mipkj ekaxsA v/khuLFk vihyh; U;k;ky; }kjk Lofoosd dk mi;ksx djrs gq, ifjlhek vf/kfu;e] 1963 dh /kkjk 5 ds vUrxZr foyEc {kH; fd;s tkus ds vkosnu dks Lohdkj fd;k x;k gSA fu.kZ; fnukad 22-5-2007 dks i<+us ls ;g dgha fofnr ugha gksrk fd iz'uxr vkns'k iw.kZ :i ls U;kf;d fl)kUr ds foijhr ikfjr fd;k x;k gSA ,u- ckykd`".ku cuke ,e- d`".kkewfrZ ,vkbZvkj 1998 ,l-lh- ist 3222 esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k gS fd%& "It is axiomatic that condonation of delay is a matter of discretion of the Court. Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not say that such discretion can be exercised only if the delay is within a certain limit. Length of delay is no matter, acceptability of the explanation is the only criterion. Sometimes delay of the shortest range may be uncondonable due to want of acceptable explanation whereas in certain other cases delay of very long range can be condoned as the explanation thereof is satisfactory. Once the Court accepts the explanation as sufficient it is the result of positive exercise of discretion and normally the superior Court should not disturb such finding, much less in revision jurisdiction, unless the exercise of discretion was wholly untenable grounds or arbitrary or perverse, but it is different matter when the first Court refuses to condone the delay. In such cases, the superior Court would be free to consider the cause shown for the delay afresh and it is open to such superior Court to come to its finding even untrammeled by the conclusion of the lower Court. 10. The reason for such a different stance is thus: the primary function of a Court is to adjudicate the dispute between the parties and the advance substantial justice. 10. The reason for such a different stance is thus: the primary function of a Court is to adjudicate the dispute between the parties and the advance substantial justice. Time limit fixed for approaching the Court in different situation is not because on the expiry of such time a bad cause would transform into a good cause." Hkkxey cuke ,e-ih- dkWijsfVo ekdsZfVax ,.M dUtwej QsMjs'ku fyfeVsM ,.M vnlZ ,vkbZvkj 2004 ,l-lh- 1230 esa ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; us vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k gS fd%& "Himachal Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act (3 of 1969), S. 93 — Limitation Act (36 of 1963), S. 5 — Award mulcting appellant with financial liability— Appeal challenging award— Delay— Condonation—Appellant during interval between date of passing award and date of his filing appeal taking steps challenging conviction and sentence imposed upon him and he succeeded in setting aside his conviction— Tehreafter moved Managing Director for exonerating him from, financial liability— All said events considered appellate authority for condoning delay— Delay condoned by appellate authority in its discretion, is well within its jurisdiction—Interference with, by High Court not proper." v/khuLFk vihyh; U;k;ky; us foyEc ds dkj.kksa ds vkSfpR; vkSj Li"Vhdj.k ij fopkj djus ds ckn foyEc] {kH; djus ds i;kZIr dkj.k ekus gSaA vr% v/khuLFk vihyh; U;k;ky; us tks foyEc {kek djus ds vkosnu i= dks Lohdkj fd;k gS] mlesa eSa gLr{ksi djuk mfpr ugha le>rk gwaA 5- ;g fufoZokn gS fd fnukad 25-11-2006 dks tc izkfFkZ;k dk vkoUVu ds fy;s izkFkZuk i= fujLr fd;k x;k rks mik;qDr mifuos'ku ,oa vkoUVu vf/kdkjh] tSlyesj us fuEu dkj.kksa ds dkj.k izkfFkZ;k dks fo'ks"k vkoUVu dk ik= ugha ekuk& ^^1- Hkwfeghu ugha] D;ksafd Lo;a ds uke 25 ch?kk pd 4 vkjth,e esa eqjCck ua- 192@44 esa vafdr gSA 2- 1998 ds ckn dh V. list ugha gSA 3- jk'kudkMZ dh izfrfyfi ugha gSA 4- ln~Hkkoh dk'rdkjh izek.ki= lqLi"V ugha gSA** blds i'pkr~ fnukad 22-2-2007 dks mik;qDr mifuos'ku ,oa vkoaVu vf/kdkjh] tSlyesj us fuEu dkj.k vafdr fd;s& ^^iqu'p%& mijksDr fcUnq la- 1 esa Lo;a ds uke 25 ch?kk pd 4 vkjth,e esa eq-ua- 192@44 lgou ls fy[kk x;k gS] ftls pd 5 bks `A' eq-ua- of.kZr ugha ¼i`"B 4@1½ i<+k tkosA bl tehu ;k vU; fdlh tehu dk fooj.k Hkh izkfFkZ;k us vius vkosnu i= esa dgha Hkh vafdr ugha fd;k gS] vFkkZr~ rF;ksa dks Nqik;k gSA** mijksDr ls Li"V gS fd izkfFkZ;k dks fo'ks"k vkoUVu dk ik= ugha ekuus ds tks dkj.k lwfpr fd;s x;s rFkk ckn esa fnukad 22-2-2007 dks dkj.k of.kZr fd;s x;s os ,dne fHkUu ugha gSA dsoy fcUnq la- 1 esa pd vkjth,e ds eqjCck ua- 192@44 dk vadu lgou ls gksus ds dkj.k i=koyh ij miyC/k vfHkys[k ds vk/kkj ij pd 5 chds,l ^,l* vafdr djus dk vkns'k fn;k x;k gSA izkfFkZ;k us mik;qDr mifuos'ku ,oa vkoUVu vf/kdkjh] tSlyesj ds vkns'k fnukad 25-11-2006 dh vihy la- 274@2007 vfrfjDr vk;qDr mifuos'ku ,oa jktLo vihy vf/kdkjh] tSlyesj ds ;gka fnukad 26-2-2007 dks izLrqr dh mlesa bl ckr dk dksbZ mYys[k ugha fd;k fd mls pd 4 vkjth,e ds eqjCck ua- 192@44 ds vfrfjDr vU; txg Hkwfe vkoafVr ugha dh xbZ gSA blh izdkj vkns'k fnukad 22-2-2007 esa mYysf[kr vU; 3 dkj.kksa dk] ftuds vk/kkj ij izkfFkZ;k dk izkFkZuk i= fujLr fd;k x;k Fkk] dks Hkh vfHkys[k ds vk/kkj ij vizkFkhZ }kjk xyr fl) ugha fd;k x;k gSA blds vfrfjDr e.My ds le{k Hkh izkfFkZ;k }kjk pd 5 chds,l ^,* esa Hkwfe ugha gksus dk Li"V [k.Mu ugha fd;k x;k gSA 6- izdj.k esa izkfFkZ;k vius vkidks fookfnr vkjkth ij vfrØeh crkdj vkoUVu djokuk pkg jgh gSA dsoy bl vk/kkj ij vizkFkhZ la- 2 dks fd;k x;k vkoUVu vfu;fer vFkok fof/k fo:) ugha dgk tk ldrkA vfrØeh ds dCts dh Hkwfe vkoafVr dh tk ldrh gS] tSlk fd jktLo e.My dh o`gn~ihB us jghe [kku cuke uwj eksgEen vkjvkjMh 1987 i`"B 54 esa vfHkfu/kkZfjr fd;k gS& "21. After a careful consideration of all the cases cited before us and taking into consideration the relevant provisions of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, we come to the conclusion that the expression "occupied land" has the same meaning in the Rules of 1970 and in the other provision of Land Revenue Act as in Section 5(27) of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act. We therefore, reply the question No. 1 in the affirmative and hold that the land in possession of a trespasser is unoccupied land available for allotment to landless persons under the Rajasthan Land Revenue (Allotment of Land of Agricultural Purposes) Rules, 1970." 7- izkfFkZ;k us vizkFkhZ la- 2 fojsUnzflag iq= nyirflag ds i{k esa fd;s x;s vkoUVu vkns'k fnukad 3-2-2007 dks vU; vihy ds ek/;e ls vFkok iz'uxr vihy ds ek/;e ls pqukSrh ugha nh gS vkSj oSls Hkh vkns'k fnukad 3-2-2007 iz'uxr vihy esa fujLr ugha fd;k tk ldrk] D;ksafd mDr vkoUVu vkns'k vafre gks pqdk gSA 8- mi;qZDr foospuk ds ifjizs{; esa vk;qDr mifuos'ku] chdkusj ds fu.kZ; fnukad 22-7-2007 esa dksbZ fof/kd =qfV ifjyf{kr ugha gksrhA mUgksaus viuh vf/kdkfjrk ds rgr iz'uxr vkns'k ikfjr fd;k gS] mlesa gLr{ksi djus dk dksbZ vkSfpR; ugha gSA rn~uqlkj fuxjkuh fujLr dh tkrh gSA 9- fu.kZ; [kqys U;k;ky; esa lquk;k x;kA