NATTHAN Vs. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of the instant writ petition, the petitioner has beseeched to quash and set-aside the order dated 14.9.2011 and 28.11.2003 passed by Additional District Judge No.1, Bharatpur and Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Bharatpur respectively.

(2.) Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and carefully perused the relevant material on record including the impugned orders, it is noticed that the applicant-respondent filed an application under Sec. 6 of Rajasthan Agricultural Credit Operations (Removal of Difficulties) Act, 1974 claiming an amount of Rs.94,400.00 against the petitioner-non applicant. The learned trial court, having analyzed the matter in detail, allowed the application vide order dated 28.11.2003 and directed the petitioner-non applicant to pay the entire amount in installments. Aggrieved with the order dated 28.11.2003, the petitioner-non applicant preferred an appeal before the Additional District Judge No.1, Bharatpur. The learned appellate court, vide its order dated 14.9.2011, dismissed the appeal of the petitioner-non applicant and affirmed the order of the trial court. There has been a concurrent finding of fact of both the courts below.

(3.) The Full Bench of the Honourable Apex court in the case of Kshitish Chandra Bose Vs. Commissioner of Ranchi reported in AIR 1981 Supreme Court 707 (1) categorically observed that the Patna High Court clearly exceeded its jurisdiction in reversing the pure concurrent findings of fact given by the trial court and the then appellate court.