DEEPA Vs. KALURAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal filed under Section 224 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 (herein-after to be referred as 'the Acl') against the judgment & decree of the Revenue Appellate Authority, Pali passed in appeal No. 262/89 on 15.7.95.

(2.) Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the plaintiff-respondents filed a revenue suit No. 10/77 u/S 53 of the Act for division of holdings in the trial court which was dismissed on 21.9.87. An appeal No. 262/89 was preferred by the plaintiff-respondents which was accepted on 15.7.95. The defendants having tell aggrieved, preferred this second appeal in this court on 1.9.95 along with certified copy of the judgment of the learned Revenue Appellate Authority with an application under Rule 17 of the Rajasthan Revenue Courts Manual : Part-1 (herein-after in short to be referred as Courts Manual) wherein it was stated that the learned appellate court-has not prepared the decree, therefore, after obtaining the decree, the same shall be produced in the court. It appears that the matter was listed for admission before the D.B. of this court on 4.10.95 and the appeal was admitted. The fact of appeal having been filed in the absence of the certified copy of the decree has not been mentioned. Be that as it may, the matter was pending for calling for he record and the service on the respondent. On 11.7.2000, an application was filed on behalf of the respondents that appeal was not maintainable in view of the provisions contained in Courts Manual and particularly Rule 17 because according to the provisions of the Courts Manual, the appeal is maintainable only when a certified copy of the decree is filed along with the memo of appeal. It appears that the appellants filed an application on 24.7.2000 in his this Court and stated inter-alia therein that on a previous occasion i.e. on 14.6.2000, copy of She decree prepared by the R.A.A., Pali was filed in the court, but that is not available in the record, therefore, the another copy of the decree after obtaining the same has been filed. Hence, the appeal be heard on merits.

(3.) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.