GOVERDHAN GURJAR Vs. STATE OF MP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A learned Single Judge of this Court having found divergence of opinion expressed by the two Division Benches in Amar Singh Vs. Raghuvir singh and others (1980 RN 6), and in Daya Ram and another Vs. State of M. P. and others [2003 (4) M. P. H. T. 435 (DB)], on the interpretation of Sections 234 and 237 of the M. P. Land Revenue Code (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code'), has, by a common order passed in these two writ petitions, referred the matter to a Larger Bench to resolve the conflict of opinion in the two decisions.

(2.) WE have heard Mr. Mukesh Pandey, learned Counsel for the petitioner in W. P. No. 952/03 and Mr. Kumaresh Pathak, learned Deputy advocate General for the respondents and we find that there is in fact no conflict in the decisions of the two Division Benches in Amar Singh Vs. Raghuvir singh and others and Daya Ram and another Vs. State of M. P. and others (supra ).

(3.) SECTIONS 234 and 237 of the M. P. Land Revenue Code, 1959, which were interpreted by the Division Benches in the two decisions are quoted hereinbelow:-