NIRANJANSINGH DONGERSINGH Vs. BRAHMA SWAROOP MOTILAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE plaintiff filed a suit on the allegation that the Zamindar of the village granted him a Maurusi Patta of the land in dispute and that he was in possession of it and had also partly cultivated it, that the Tehsildar in contravention of law gave Patta of this land to the defendant under the Madhya Bharat Land Utilisation Act (Act No. 38 of 1950). The trial Court held that in view of section 6 of the Madhya Bharat Land Utilisation Act, a civil Court cannot call in question an order passed under the Act, and, therefore, dismissed the suit. This decision was upheld in appeal. This is plaintiff's second appeal. Section 6 of the Land Utilisation Act runs thus: -

(2.) ALTHOUGH it is true that an order under the Act cannot be called in question by a civil Court, yet if an order transcends the limits of the law or Act or is given in contravention of law, then certainly it is open to the civil Court to see whether the Tehsildar has acted within the four corners of law or not. If he has acted against the law, his order is a nullity and can be so pronounced by a civil Court. I am fortified in my view by the observations of the Privy Council reported in Secretary of State v. Mask and Co. AIR 1940 PC 105 which are as follows: -

(3.) FOR reasons stated above, I allow the appeal and setting aside the judgments of the Courts below, remit the case to the trial Court to decide the case in accordance with observations made above. The costs hitherto incurred shall be borne by the parties.