GOKULAL Vs. SHANKARLAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an appeal against the Order of the Deputy Collector, Jagir, Udaipur dated 24. 5. 1961. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent Shankar Lal preferred a claim for compensation for the resumption of the Jagir villages Peepwas and Wana situated in Udaipur district mentioning that the appellant Gokul Lal, Rup Lal and Ganesh Lal, father of appellant Prabhu Lal, were co-sharers to the extent of one-fourth each therein. An award of compensation was determined provisionally. To that an objection was raised by the respondent Shankar Lal that he alone was entitled to the grant of the compensation for the whole Jagir. THIS objection was based by him on certain judgments of various courts as well as the agreements between the parties. THIS was contested by the appellants. The learned Deputy Collector Jagir did not take pains to decide these claims and counter-claims. On the other hand, simply because the judgments produced before him directed that the various share holders could have their rights determined by a competent court and till then the collection of the rents of the Jagir be continued to be done by the father of the respondents, Shri Lilapat, the learned Deputy Collector observed that as the appellants did not prefer to have their rights determined accordingly, it was Lilapat alone who could have the right to get the compensation for the resumption of the Jagir. He, therefore, directed that the appellants should have their rights determined by a competent court and further that the award be finalised in favour of the respondents.

(2.) OBVIOUSLY, this is an Order passed quite contrary to the provisions of sec. 37 of the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resumption of Jagirs Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ). This section so far as is relevant for the purposes of the present case provides that whenever in the course of a proceeding under the Act, any question relating to title, right or interest in any Jagir land arises and the question so arising has not been already determined by a competent authority, it is the Jagir Commissioner who shall enquire into the merits of the case and pass necessary orders therein. It is, therefore, only the Jagir Commissioner who could be the competent authority or court for deciding the dispute between the parties regarding the claim to the title of the present Jagir. The learned Deputy Collector was absolutely in error in avoiding to decide the dispute and on the other hand directing the appellants, simply on the basis of the directions in the previous judgments produced before him,that the appellants should have their right determined by a competent court. After the coming into force of the Act and the resumption of the Jagir, there was no court other than of the Jagir Commissioner competent to decide such disputes. The only limitation to the exercise of this power by the Jagir Commissioner was that the matter under dispute should not have been already decided by a competent authority. In the present case it is clear from the very judgments produced that the dispute had not been already decided by any competent authority and had on the other hand been left undecided.