Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 200 (MP)

State of Madhya Pradesh v. Ritu Bhadoriya

2021-02-22

RAJEEV KUMAR SHRIVASTAVA

body2021
ORDER : Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava, J. 1. This Review Petition has been filed for review/recall of the order/judgment dated 4.9.2019 passed in Second Appeal No. 40/2015 (Ku. Ritu Bhadoriya and others vs. Bhamwari Bai and others), whereby the second appeal was disposed of in terms of the compromise arrived at between the parties. 2. On 4th September, 2019 in Second Appeal No. 40/2015, an order was passed on the application filed by the parties under Order 23 Rule 3 CPC, for disposal of the appeal on the basis of compromise between the parties. The compromise was duly verified by the Principal Registrar of this Bench. This Court passed following order:- "12. Consequently, the second appeal stands disposed of in terms of the compromise arrived at between the parties in the following manner:- (i) It is declared that the appellants, who are plaintiffs in Civil Suit No. 65/2000 (New No. 1A/2010), are declared title holder of land bearing Survey No. 306 area 6 bigha 13 biswas, Survey No. 308 area 3 bighas 14 biswas, total area 10 bighas 7 biswas situated at District Sheopur; (ii) Permanent injunction is granted against respondent No. 1 with regard to the aforesaid property and respondent No. 1 is hereby directed not to interfere in any manner in the peaceful possession of the appellants/plaintiffs over the property. 13. Decree be drawn accordingly. Parties shall bear their own costs." 3. On perusal of record, it is apparent that earlier Sundara was the owner of the disputed land. Learned counsel for the State has submitted that Sundara belongs to Scheduled Tribe community, therefore, there is a restriction under Section 165 (6) of Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code with regard to transfer of land. Hence, prays for reviewing/recalling the impugned order in the teeth of the new fact as aforesaid, which was not brought before this Court at the time of passing the order under review. 4. Per Contra, learned counsel for respondents have opposed the submission made by learned counsel for the State. Learned counsel for respondents No. 1 to 3 has submitted that in the year 1977, Schedule was published in respect of original tribes. Copy of Schedule is also filed. It is further submitted that in the aforesaid Schedule, "Sheopur Kalan" has been mentioned at serial no. Learned counsel for respondents No. 1 to 3 has submitted that in the year 1977, Schedule was published in respect of original tribes. Copy of Schedule is also filed. It is further submitted that in the aforesaid Schedule, "Sheopur Kalan" has been mentioned at serial no. 6 not "Sheopur" and after the notification dated 21/2/1977, there is no amendment in respect of name of scheduled area and that "Sheopur" and "Sheopur Kalan" both are same areas neither any documentary evidence has been produced with regard to aforesaid, therefore, no case for reviewing the order is made out, hence prays for rejection of the present review petition. 5. Heard learned counsel for the rival parties and perused the available record. 6. Section 165 (6) of MP Land Revenue Code, 1959 reads as under:- "165. Rights of transfer.-- (6) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1) the right of Bhumiswami belonging to a tribe which has been declared to be an aboriginal tribe by the State Government by a notification in that behalf, for the whole or art of the area to which this Code applies shall- (i) in such areas as are predominately inhabited by aboriginal tribes and from such date as the State Government may, by notification, specify, not be transferred nor it shall be transferred either by way of sale or otherwise or as a consequence of transaction of loan to a person not belonging to such tribe in the area specified in the notification; (ii) in areas other than those specified in the notification under clause (I), not to be transferred or be transferable either by way of sale or otherwise or as a consequence of transaction of loan to a person not belonging to such tribe without the permission of a Revenue Officer not below the rank of Collector, given for reasons to be recorded in writing." 7. It is submitted by the counsel for the State that the land in dispute belonged to Sundara, a person of Scheduled Tribe Community and, therefore, such land cannot be transferred in the light of the restriction imposed in Section 165 (6) of MP Land Revenue Code. Moreover, till date no order passed by Appropriate Authority for grant of permission to transfer the land has been produced. Moreover, till date no order passed by Appropriate Authority for grant of permission to transfer the land has been produced. Hence, it can safely be held that such land, which is in the ownership of a Scheduled Tribe person cannot be transferred unless the provisions of Section 165 of the Code are complied with. 8. Aforesaid facts were neither brought up before the Principal Registrar of this Court during verification of factum of compromise nor before this Court at the time of passing the order under review, therefore, the ends of justice demands that Second Appeal No. 40/2015 be restored to its original number for hearing afresh. 9. Resultantly, present Review Petition is allowed and Second Appeal No. 40/2015 (Ku. Ritu Bhadoriya and others vs. Bhamwari Bai and others) is hereby restored to its original number. Let the Second Appeal be listed for final hearing in due course.