CHHATARSINGH Vs. RANJIT HARNAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 1959 MPLJ 738 is "no longer to be regarded as a good law in view of the provisions of the right of appeal against the order of the Tahsildar under section 38 -A(1) of the Act".

(2.) IN my opinion, it would not be correct to say that the aforesaid decision of the High Court has ceased to be good law after the enactment of section 38 -A. The High Court's decision is affected only to the extent that an order passed by the Tahsildar, purely under section 38(2), has now been made appealable. To this extent alone, one might say that the view of the High Court can no longer hold the field; but there is nothing in section 38 -A to supersede the view of the High Court in other respect, namely, that, in case an application under section 38(2) is accompanied by a prayer for mutation, the same shall be treated as one under section 86 of the M.B. Land Revenue and Tenancy Act, and the forum of appeal shall accordingly be determined in accordance with sections 35 and 36 of the M.B. Land Revenue and Tenancy Act. Once an application is taken out of the ambit of section 38 of the M.B. Abolition of Zamindari Act the provisions of section 38 -A prescribing only one appeal cease to have any relevancy. I, therefore, disagree with the view taken by the Additional Commissioner and set aside his order accordingly.