JAREENA BEE Vs. NAVAB JAFAR ALI KHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This miscellaneous petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed against the order dated 05.03.2020 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Bhopal Division Bhopal in Case No. 233/Appeal/2018-19, by which the application of the petitioners under Section 89 of MPLR Code has been dismissed as not maintainable and the order of the S.D.O. has been set aside.

(2.) The necessary facts for disposal of the present petition in short are that the petitioners filed an application under Section 115, 116 of MPLR Code before the Court of Tahsildar, Kurwai, District Vidisha for the correction of map in respect of Survey No. 471/1 area 1.066 hectare and Survey No. 471/2. During the pendency of the said proceedings, some objections were filed by the respondents, which were rejected by the Tahsildar by order dated 18.03.2010. Against the said interlocutory order, the respondents filed a revision before the Court of Additional Collector, Vidisha, which was registered as Case No. 58/Revision/09- 10 and the Additional Collector, Vidisha by its order dated 02.04.2012 remanded the matter back to the Tahsildar with a direction that the application filed by the petitioners under Section 115, 116 of MPLR Code be treated as an application under Section 107 of MPLR Code and after conducting an enquiry, a report be forwarded to the Collector. Accordingly, the Tahsildar obtained an application under Section 107 of MPLR Code from the parties and forwarded its report dated 15.12.2013 to the Collector through SDO. The Collector sought a report from the Superintendent (Land Records) and thereafter, the Collector found that in fact, the case falls within the purview of Section 89 of MPLR Code, therefore, transferred the case to the SDO for further action. Accordingly, the application was registered as Case No. 31/A-5/14-15 by the SDO under Section 89 of MPLR Code and by order dated 05.06.2017 allowed the application and directed for correction of map.

(3.) Against the order of SDO, Kurwai District Vidisha, respondents filed an appeal before the Court of Additional Commissioner, Bhopal Division, Bhopal, who by the impugned order dated 05.03.2020 has held that looking to the controversy involved in the present case, the application under Section 89 of MPLR Code was not maintainable and set aside the order of the SDO, Kurwai District Vidisha and also held that Batankan on the basis of the possession is erroneous, whereas Batankan should have been done on the basis of the lands sold by the seller.