DATTATREYA Vs. COMPETENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal arises from a judgment and decree of the 1 A.D.J. Dhar in a Civil Appeal No. 80A/80 which was allowed against the judgment and decree passed by the learned Civil Judge, Class-II, Manawar in Civil Suit No. 19A/76 dated 28.4.1979.

(2.) THE short facts giving rise to this appeal are that Laxmanrao was the owner of land in question which is detailed better in the suit as also in the judgment of the trial Court. He was holding total land admeasuring 139.28 acres of land. Laxmanrao died on 11.06.1972 leaving behind him two sons Dattatrya and Balvantrao. He also had a pre-deceased son Yadavrao. Yadavrao have three children and a widow. Dattatrya have seven children and wife and Balvantrao had been unmarried. The question under M.P. Ceiling on Agricultural Holdings Act, 1960 (for short the Act) arose about the holdings of the family. The law came into force from 1.1.1974 and under the provisions of the Act the appointed date is fixed as 7.3.1974. The required form under the provisions of the Act was filledin by Balvantrao and other members of the family. In the form they have shown some land transferred to respondents No. 2 to 7. The said transfer was made between 1.1.1971 and 7.3.1974. After considering the form the competent authority under the Act came to the conclusion that the family of the appellants consisted of more than five members and, therefore, was entitled to retain 108 acres of dry land whereas they were in possession of 138.28 acres. Therefore, they were in excess of the ceiling limit and land admeasuring 31.21 acres was in excess in their possession. The competent authority held that the land transferred between 1.1.1971 and 7.3.1974 is hit by section 4 of the Act, which reads thus : Notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force, where after, the 1st January, 1971 but before the appointed day, any holder has transferred any land held by him by way of sale, gift, exchange or otherwise or has effected a partition of his holding or part thereof or the holding held by the holder has been transferred in execution of a decree of any Court, the competent authority may, after notice to the holder and other persons affected by such transfer or partition and after such enquiry as it thinks fit to make, declare the transfer or partition to be void if it finds that the transfer or the partition, as the case may be, was made in anticipation or to defeat the provisions of this Act.

(3.) THE trial Court decreed the suit setting aside the order of the Competent Authority. The appellate Court reversed the same by holding that under section 46 of the Act there is a bar of civil suit with respect to the settlement etc. under the Act by the Competent Authority. Section 46 of the Act reads thus : Save as expressly provided in this Act, no Civil Court shall have any jurisdiction to settle, decide or deal with any question which is by or under this Act required to be settled, decided or dealt with by the Competent Authority.