KISHANLAL Vs. BADRILAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER claims to have purchased some land belonging to respondent No. 1 for consideration of Rs. 4,500/ - vide an agreement to sell. The transaction was, however, challenged by respondent No. 1 by filing an application under section 5 of the Madhya Pradesh Samaj Ke KamjorVargon Ke Krishi Bhumi Dharakon Ka Udhar Dene Walon Ke Bhumi Hadpane Sambandhi Kuchakron Se Paritran Tatha Mukti Adhiniyam, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'Adhiniyam, 1976) before the SDO who after issuance of notice and on an enquiry concluded that the transaction fell within the prohibited zone under the Adhiniyam and ordered to set aside the transaction. Petitioner took an appeal before Collector raising pleas of limitation and questioning the status of respondent No. 1 as belonging to weaker section. His appeal, however, failed. He has now filed this petition to assail the orders of SDO and Collector on the ground that impugned orders were passed in disregard of the requirement of section 5 of Adhiniyam which contemplated a preliminary enquiry to be made by the SDO before issuing notice. He has also raised a factual dispute that petitioner could not be said to be belonging to weaker section as he was earning Rs. 10,000/ - or more p.a.