VIJAY BEN PATEL Vs. STATE OF C G

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The substantial questions of law formulated and to be answered in this second appeal are as under:--

(2.) Mr. Prafull N. Bharat, learned counsel appearing for the appellants/plaintiffs would submit that both the Courts below have fallen into palpable legal error in dismissing the suit of the plaintiffs as they have purchased scheduled suit land on 11/03/1988 from Shri Abdul Kaji, original holder of the land from the State Government, whereas Section 165(7-b) and Section 158(3) of the Code came into statue book with effect from 28/10/1992. He would further submit that Section 165(7-b) of the Code is directory in nature, and non-compliance thereof would not make the transfer void therefore, judgment and decree passed by both the Courts below be set-aside and appeal be allowed.

(3.) Mr. Vinay Harit, Dy. Advocate General for the State/defendants would support the judgment and decree impugned and submit that Section 165(7-b) of the Code is mandatory in nature and non-compliance of the mandatory provision would make the transfer void and therefore, appeal deserves to be dismissed.